43 Reply by FSDev| TALON (edited by FSDev| TALON 2008-02-08 19:48:23)

  • From: Manchester
  • Registered: 2006-11-03
  • Posts: 9,993

Re: Feb. 6th News Update - Ryloth, New Vehicles

Yeah, true, but for once I was thinking about gameplay and balancing the power of that thing in game.

wink

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v600/TALON_TAW/TALONSIGNEWB-1.jpg
http://stats.fsmod.com/fssig.php?player=Talon-UK
http://stats.fsmod.com/sig/pilot.Talon-UK.png

FSDev| TALON's Website

  • CAAM
  • CAAM
  • FirstStrike Stress Tester
  • Offline
  • From: Ft. Lauderdale, Florida
  • Registered: 2006-07-25
  • Posts: 543

Re: Feb. 6th News Update - Ryloth, New Vehicles

Imperial wrote:

Seeing that AT-ST Pilots have a complete 360 degree view of the outside world and don't rely on a tiny little hatch lorewise, I thought you of all people would agree tongue

It has been play tested though and does not negatively impact balance and makes the ATST actually usable, right now 90% of the time it is left behind and unused because no one can see and shoot at the same time in the thing.

I wholeheartedly agree with the nose-cam for the AT-ST. big_smile

http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e67/CAAM-1/SigWIP4.gif
  • From: Austria
  • Registered: 2007-09-29
  • Posts: 581

Re: Feb. 6th News Update - Ryloth, New Vehicles

hmm, i disagree, the AT-ST is the nightmare of any infantry (except maybe the HWS with rocket launchers). just hearing their steps coming closer makes you crawl into some little safe spot where the beast maybe won't see you. the view radius is quite okay on the old maps, since there is only infantry against them, and the AT-STs would become too strong imo. On Ryloth, it might be useful to have and advanced view against fighters

____________
Former GC player known as "Saupadl"
GC-Veteran from 2 to 5.3
Ingame Name: FsTest Saupadl

HagenSaubauch's Website

46 Reply by Safe-Keeper (edited by Safe-Keeper 2008-02-08 21:27:39)

  • From: Grong, Norway
  • Registered: 2006-07-25
  • Posts: 5,192

Re: Feb. 6th News Update - Ryloth, New Vehicles

I strongly disagree about the walker, too. It's an infantry-killer and does not need a nose-cam. What it needs is an indicator for the commander and gunner both indicating which way the head is facing. The main gun screen could use a 2x zoom feature, too.

And I think we need to make it a bit more clear to players that it's the #2 position that controls the main gun (when I'm playing with the AT-ST, I jump into the #2 position when faced with enemies, as it's far more accurate and has far more firepower).

Are the twin blasters anti-infantry or AA?

Aw, c'mon, have you ever played an FPS where rapid-firing AA guns were not also devastating to infantry tongue ?

"One of the bitches actually gave birth while she was attacking, and her puppies joined in on the carnage."
--the awesomeness that is Boatmurdered.

Safe-Keeper's Website

47 Reply by mechag2 (edited by mechag2 2008-02-08 22:20:30)

  • mechag2
  • mechag2
  • Emperor's Royal Guard
  • Offline
  • From: California, USA
  • Registered: 2006-01-17
  • Posts: 373

Re: Feb. 6th News Update - Ryloth, New Vehicles

Imperial wrote:
FSDev| TALON wrote:

Indeed, I'm not sure about adding a nose view to the AT-ST myself.

Seeing that AT-ST Pilots have a complete 360 degree view of the outside world and don't rely on a tiny little hatch lorewise, I thought you of all people would agree tongue

It has been play tested though and does not negatively impact balance and makes the ATST actually usable, right now 90% of the time it is left behind and unused because no one can see and shoot at the same time in the thing.

I would love it if AT-STs had their 360 degree holographic imaging finally implemented into a Star Wars game. I guess I'm okay with a HUD view for the AT-ST.

Will the control over the light blaster cannon/concussion grenade launcher and twin blaster cannons be swapped between the pilot and co-pilot? Because this little lore discrepency it irks me. lol

Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity.
  • From: Grong, Norway
  • Registered: 2006-07-25
  • Posts: 5,192

Re: Feb. 6th News Update - Ryloth, New Vehicles

Will the control over the light blaster cannon/concussion grenade launcher and twin blaster cannons be swapped between the pilot and co-pilot? Because it irks me.

Nah, it's fine as it is. Encourages you to bring a gunner, either way, and thus prevents lonewolfing.

"One of the bitches actually gave birth while she was attacking, and her puppies joined in on the carnage."
--the awesomeness that is Boatmurdered.

Safe-Keeper's Website

49 Reply by mechag2 (edited by mechag2 2008-02-08 22:25:34)

  • mechag2
  • mechag2
  • Emperor's Royal Guard
  • Offline
  • From: California, USA
  • Registered: 2006-01-17
  • Posts: 373

Re: Feb. 6th News Update - Ryloth, New Vehicles

Safe-Keeper wrote:

Will the control over the light blaster cannon/concussion grenade launcher and twin blaster cannons be swapped between the pilot and co-pilot? Because it irks me.

Nah, it's fine as it is. Encourages you to bring a gunner, either way, and thus prevents lonewolfing.

Hmm... I don't see it that way. The AT-ST can be lone-wolfed as it is. Having a gunner just makes it that much more lethal. To me, it's an unnecessary balance issue which sacrifices lore accuracy in the process.

Is "vehicle free-look" being implemented in v1.2? It comes in VERY handy. Specifically for fighters.

Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity.