I haven't watcthed the 4th stream yet, but I do think that making devastators act as temporary tech priests is so completely lazy on game design on Behaviours part. Devastators do not know how to repair vehicles, they are heavy weapon specialists.. Don't do this Behaviour, I'd rather you wait and release the tech priest class, or just take out vehicle repair altogether.
YEAH JEEZE HOW HARD CAN IT BE TO JUST MAKE ONE NEW CHAR GUYZ? just make sure it has all the servo thingies on the back. and, like a new laser cutter gun thing. and some AI servitors to follow him around, love those little dudes. and a pony.
Literally made my day. On topic. Been reading some posts and saw something about "killin tank" and such. Here's what I think about all this: I think vehicles should have 3 states, just like characters have. State number 1: Positive hp / armour. As example: a. Character lives, runs around, shoots and stuff. b. Tank is drivable. You can sit in it, drive around, shoot things. State number 2: Bleeding out / immobile. As example: a. Character got damaged and his hp reached 0. Now he is bleeding out and waiting to be executed. b. Tanks hp reached 0 after taking some hits, but damage was taken from (as example again) heavy bolter and not plasma cannon. Now tank is in immobile state and needs repairing. It won't function unless it's back to 50% - 70% hp again. State number 3: dead. a. Character reached a certain point of -hp due to execution or bleeding out and is now dead. Waiting to respawn. b. Tank reached a certain point of -hp due to not being repaired in time or another plasma cannon shot. Tank explodes, leaving some burning silhouette in its place for some time. Reasons to this, I guess: - Adding just an additional state to vehicles adds a little bit more realism, without really being too harsch on EC servers or our computers. - An immobilized tank could provide some good tactical cover for drivers and squads, who followed that vehicle. - And burning rests of an exloded tank should be damaging to people, who came to close. (well, that maybe is too much...) - Well... About heavy bolter being a Predator killer... To be honest, it kinda feels a bit wrong. Sure, it should deal dmg, but not that much and predator shouldn't probably explode by it, but simply reach state of immobility. Sorry for another wall of text (and probably bad english). I do hope that I made it easy enough to read though.
It also isn't a standard FPS game, if it turns out just to be an FPS with a 40k skin then it will lose a lot of it's player base. Sure, some people can but I wouldn't call them the majority of players, if they have the time a patience to be able to perfect a shot like that then they deserve to be able to pull it off. Maybe the problem is then the attitude of the players and not the mechanics, but OK fair point. Maybe you want to stop assuming that every single computer game and every single MMO uses the same acronyms and try not to be so patronising? Of course the reward is the satisfaction of being able to pull off the tank kill with your close combat weapons, a lot like the players that perfected head shots at 300M practise makes perfect. Like I said it's what I want to see, I'm not speaking for everyone else (and neither are you), if I'm playing Kaazid the Ork, when I get into a tank I'm still Kaazid the Ork not tank number 348, maybe it's not the way it's going to happen but the way you seem to think it will be seems a very simplistic dumbing down of mechanics. Who's talking about arbitrary limits? You stated that you expected 1 in 10 people to pull tanks and called it "rare", my opinion is that 1 in 10 would make tanks common, 1 in 50 would be rare. Tanks, like elites and heroes will be limited by resources and costs and the fact that they will get destroyed quite quickly and be a huge RP sink.
I have to agree with this. I'm not a fan of systems in which a vehicle takes damage input in only one form and explodes upon reaching 0 hp in every instance. It feels wrong. A vehicle exploding and being disabled should be two very different things - whereas the crew may or may not be still alive, and the vehicle may or may not be repairable if the vehicle has been disabled in someway. On the contrary if a vehicle is destroyed, then there are no may or may nots; the crew is dead and the vehicle is terminated. And like you said I think certain weapons should lead primarily (as to not exclude the possibility of the other ever happening) to either disabling a vehicle or destroying it. Whereas things like rockets could either lead to destruction or disablement depending on the location of the hit, etc, etc. To address concerns people had earlier about masses of 'Tech Marines' (or their equivalents) from forming up behind armored rows and repairing so much that the enemy couldn't destroy the armor; there's a simple solution (that may or may not have been mentioned). 1. Make repairs location based. You get hit in the front armor, the 'Tech' has to repair the front armor specifically and no where else. If your main gun gets taken out, or your track is blow apart, the 'Tech' has to repair that specifically as well. If the vehicle was disabled the 'Tech' would have to go around and repair the specific areas which were damaged relating to the disablement. This would make repairing more challenging and fun, in my opinion. Whereas repairing has been a mindless task in the past this would now give the 'Tech' more purpose. Yeah, this might be a little bit elaborate but you can't deny that it would't give vehicular warfare a whole new depth as far as teamwork and smart game-play are concerned. And plus I just want this game to rock... so on to the second thing. 2. Give vehicles a limit as to how many 'Techs' can repair at one time. In RL if there are 15 mechanics changing your oil all at once, it's not going to go any faster than if 2-3 were doing it. There's only so much that can be done, and in fact it might even be a slower process with that many people in each other's way. The fact is that there is a perfect ratio of mechanics to 'problems'. You have to few mechanics and too many problems, it gets done slow. You have too many mechanics and not enough problems, it gets done slow. More mechanics doesn't equal faster repair in RL, there's a sweet spot. So make it so only one 'Tech' can repair a damaged area area at a time on a vehicle. If only your front armor is damaged, you can only have one 'Tech' repairing it at a time. Or, you could set limits on the number of 'Techs' that can repair based upon the size of the vehicle as well. Smaller means less 'Techs' while larger means more 'Techs'.
You're right, it isn't going to be an FPS, it's going to be a TPS, historically a genre that has radically different ... no wait the other thing... incredibly similar (if not identical) mechanics and focus. Usually the only difference between a TPS and an FPS is the the camera angle and many times you change between them as the situation requires (FPS going into third person when taking cover, TPS going into first person for sniping/sharpshooting). Ok maybe you missed that, let me try again.... That's true, many games don't use the same acronyms, by CC meaning crowd control is used in WoW (and every other MMORPG), DotA, Lol... basically any rpg style game that has crowd control skills, uses CC as crowd control. I'd honestly be surprised if there was one that didn't and then I'd expect that CC would be context sensitive rather than just 1 meaning. Not if the vehicle explodes in an aoe blast, as I mentioned it's basically the martydom perk from CoD but instead of having 1/2 seconds to get away it just gibs you if you don't have enough health. As I said earlier, if killing tanks with melee isn't rewarding enough they are just going to use lascannons and why bother having them in the game if they aren't used. By that logic does that mean you will delete your character and create a new one with a different name when you die? Kaazid the Ork got reduced to flaming cinders, no respawn for him, better create a new character. Also don't be so disingenuous about it being 'dumbed down mechanics', using the method I talk about (the one used in PS2, the entire BF series, partially in ArmA, CoD:WaW etc) is much more accessible to players especially the ones who don't have a realism fetish. As I've said countless times now, Mil-Sims and high realism shooters are niche games, they are niche games for a reason! Well if you want tanks to be rare in a game where players can choose what they want to use their req on, you are going to have to put in arbitary limits. But as I said earlier, if you want tanks to be useless, because they die easily, then you will get your wish about rarity, but don't complain later that people are using tanks as battle taxis.
We're not going to agree so we may as well drop the subject and see what the devs do and how the game handles and plays, like I said these are only ideas I'm tossing about, no one has to agree or disagree with them I'd like to put my point about tanks being rare into perspective, I've been on these forums for a long time and from various posts by devs on the subject of vehicles, elites and heroes they have always said that they will be a rarity and small percentage of the units in play, how they intend to manage that is their business, I'm just accepting as red that indeed such things will therefore be rare. They have constantly said tanks will be rare and will require multiple players to operate as this is an infantry based game not world of tanks.
