PDA

View Full Version : The driver-gunner rule. Worry.


Origim
18th Aug 2004, 01:06 PM
I know that in this post I will tackle the very core of XMP gameplay, therefore I will suggest considering the following idea as an option that can be turned on/off.

Disclaimer: the following is my opinion only.

All the vehicles in XMP, except the tank, had the driver only driving and the gunner only..gunning. Gunner recieved points, while driver did not. In public games, vehicles were used VERY little because of (a)bad handling (b) you needed a gunner (frustrating to wait for one) and (c) driver did not recieve any points and was looked down upon at the end of a game as 'useless new player who can't score anything' by many. I know I was when I played the role of a driver.

Having one person shoot and other drive in a small vehicle such as the Raptor buggy is more of an annoyance IMO than teamwork. Both driver and gunner need to be in perfect sync to achieve any usefulness from a vehicle, and that is hard to do even in clan games (you might be trying to aim, but then a driver suddenly changes direction and you miss completely).


With that said, i therefore propose to make the following changes to gameplay:

**Raptor/Buggy: XMP original: Driver - drives. Gunner- shoots the cannon.

CHANGES: Make the Raptor a one person vehicle, with the cannon contollable by the driver himself (like UT2004's scorpion).

**The big tank (forgot the name): XMP Original: Driver - drives & controlls a close range flamethrower. Gunner- controlls the main cannon.

CHANGES: leave as is.

**Rocket launcher vehicle (forgot the name, again): XMP Original (correct me if I'm wrong on this one): Driver- drives. Gunner #1- controls the rocket launcher. Gunner #2- controls the aft high-refire rate EMP gun.

CHANGES: Make the driver drive and control the rocket launcher. Leave the aft EMP gun for a gunner to control.


In my opinion, that will make the vehicles more useful.

UT2004 scored it right with vehicles- they made Solo vehicles such as Scorpion/Manta/Raptor, then they made vehicles that could be controlled solo, but would be more useful if with a gunner (Goliath/Leviathan/upcoming Cicada), and then there is a full teamwork vehicles such as Hellbender. That system made me want to buy the game now when I tried the demo.



Also, on a side note, if Beta ever becomes avilable, contact me. I would be happy to test it. (May test 4-6 hours/week, sometimes (maybe) up to 14 houes/week) :)

Emmet Otter
18th Aug 2004, 01:12 PM
I think the best way to solve this is to split the points since it requires both to handle it. Making the raptor a one man vehicle would not be a good idea imo. The raptor is the best getaway for two artifact carriers. All vehicles should be left like the originals.

Pro^Kp
18th Aug 2004, 01:12 PM
well like u said there should be an enable/disable in the server.ini for this i would always have it on disabled personally, no offence but i like the vehicles the way they are.

Btw The Big Tank is the Juggernaught and the rocket bus (lol) is the Harbinger

Origim
18th Aug 2004, 01:17 PM
I think the best way to solve this is to split the points since it requires both to handle it. Making the raptor a one man vehicle would not be a good idea imo. The raptor is the best getaway for two artifact carriers. All vehicles should be left like the originals.

Well, I know that driver-gunner system HAS it's advantages- driver tries to run to the base as fast as he can, while the artifact carrier gunner shoots any pursuit.... It would be hard to achieve a balance. Maybe you're right, vehicles should stay as they are....

Maybe the DEVs could atleast add some one person vehicle that can be similar to a Scoprion? :(

[Shadow]Aksen
18th Aug 2004, 01:35 PM
I always felt it would disrupt the balance.

washuu
18th Aug 2004, 01:36 PM
Since it's on ut2k4, any server owner could add a mutator, that can use ut2k4 vehicles/weapons.

I personally don't see to much of a problem from harby and raptor.

JaFO
18th Aug 2004, 02:23 PM
// Origim
If changes to the XMP-vehicles are made and they are optional then I'd rather see them as a mutator that can be filtered instead of a server-side option that's invisible.
Such a mutator could also allow people to create replacement vehicles for the default XMP-variants.

I think the better option would be to count any kills by the gunner(s) as 'assisted' kills for the rest of the crew.
Perhaps as an additional 'feature' you could also award points to the driver for transporting the artifact-carrier to the base-zone ?

Dandeloreon1984
18th Aug 2004, 02:25 PM
i think the balance is just right, because the driver of the harby had to work hard to not roll the vehicle, and on utxmp it will probobly be the same.

Origim
18th Aug 2004, 02:27 PM
Assisting score would be a great idea! That way the driver will atleast be able to gain something. :)

Dandeloreon1984
18th Aug 2004, 02:35 PM
i like that idea, because i am a mean driver in the vehicles that are fast, and unruly.

[DF]phalanx
18th Aug 2004, 04:08 PM
ok i personally like it the way it is
however i would like the switch mode from UT2004 implemented
so u can swap from driver to gunner by pressing the weapon numbers
rather then getting out

Major-Lee-High
18th Aug 2004, 04:50 PM
I just hope ill still be able to catch mad air over a hill and land on someone gutblowing them while blowing the horn in the raptor.

The new engine should fix the handling, which was my only issue with the vehicles before, although i never used anything but the raptor lol.

I think it would be cool to see the ut vehicles used in xmp as well, with some new skins that make em match xmp, i think they would fit right in and add more variety, hopefully people do this in custom maps etc.

Dandeloreon1984
18th Aug 2004, 04:56 PM
I agree with phalanx on the idea of being able to switch positions in the vehicle, because it is a pain to get into the wrong seat, and haft to get out of the vehicle to move to the right positiong :/

Major-Lee-High
18th Aug 2004, 05:08 PM
I would think that kind of thing is already in just from using ut vehicle code, i doubt they removed it...

[DF]phalanx
18th Aug 2004, 05:51 PM
hmm
will mappers be able to use UT2004 vehicles tho :/

Dandeloreon1984
18th Aug 2004, 06:16 PM
ya... with some tweaks, yes.... i thought i saw an ut2k4 vehicle in a utxmp map... but it was only a raptor... lol...

Promo 1 (http://www.free-monkey.com/main/promo/promo1.jpg)

[DF]phalanx
18th Aug 2004, 06:38 PM
rofl
yay raptors

Bleeder
18th Aug 2004, 06:49 PM
Plz don't change the driver/gunner capabilities! Default setting should be as it was!

ONE SUGGESTION: Always thought it was fake that driver and gunner must be same team... How about driver/gunner can be opposing teams??? Now that will be funny. Again I think this should be an option, but not the default "Stock XMP" setting.

W0RF
18th Aug 2004, 08:26 PM
Technically you can gut-blow in a raptor, not exactly a weapon per se but the better drivers sure got them some points that way :D

Maybe a small auto-cannon for the driver? Similar in RoF and damage to the UT assault rifle? It does rather suck that drivers can't actually shoot anything. But then again, the driver of the 3-man "jeep" in UT doesn't shoot either so...

If nothing else, I guess at least being able to button-switch between seats will help...

Reeps
18th Aug 2004, 08:51 PM
hmm
will mappers be able to use UT2004 vehicles tho :/
I think that might ruin the xmp gameplay tbh. I'm not sure how that will work. To me it'd be like adding a manta into something like Red Orchestra (www.redorchestramod.com). :hmm:

Oh_Duh
19th Aug 2004, 07:25 AM
Did you ever notice the 2 little grinders on the front of the raptor? Those are for gutblows. :D I have seen some ppl get very high scores using them. Isn't that right Dandel. The balance is good ...leave it alone. :stick:

[DF]phalanx
19th Aug 2004, 09:09 AM
lol
phear teh griders
cant say dandel used em very well tho
i know give gunners a gun that fires those :)

atticbat
19th Aug 2004, 11:24 AM
heh, I am soooo jazzed about this. Simply amazing.

I used to chuckle whenever I saw someone ripping the low scoring players for their 'noobish skills', kind of the pot calling the kettle black.

#1 is fun.
#2 is TEAM SCORE. Individual scores still are cool, but just lead to a lack of team spirit, imo...

I can;t wait to see how this plays out. I am sure we will see the 'league standard' setup for UTXMP, just like with ONS now, but Excessive Overkill for UTXMP?!?! omg...

or Chaos UTXMP? woof.

Not to mention Air power/Advanced Armor... all sorts of variety will come of this. And all of us will have our fave versions.

Most anticipated mod ever. For me anyways ;)

supersmell
19th Aug 2004, 01:19 PM
If nothing else, I guess at least being able to button-switch between seats will help...
You could never take on a tank with one person in it alone if it had instant switching.

Dandeloreon1984
19th Aug 2004, 01:55 PM
Did you ever notice the 2 little grinders on the front of the raptor? Those are for gutblows. :D I have seen some ppl get very high scores using them. Isn't that right Dandel. The balance is good ...leave it alone. :stick:

you are right, but don't make me haft to pull the raptor out on you, i have been shying away from drivin it as much lately, so don't give me a reason to go and have some...:lol:


:man::man:

Major-Lee-High
19th Aug 2004, 04:04 PM
I think that might ruin the xmp gameplay tbh. I'm not sure how that will work. To me it'd be like adding a manta into something like Red Orchestra (www.redorchestramod.com). :hmm:

IMO all the ut vehicles would fit in perfect, aside from their skins, aslong as the map they are in fit them. A manta in garden or beach would be pretty cool, i can see any class wasting it without a problem too, but then a leviathan in garden wouldnt really fit but in a bigger map i think it would be ok. A scorpion would fit anywhere a raptor is.

Captain Kewl
19th Aug 2004, 04:53 PM
The ONS vehicles would have to be rescaled to fit everything else. XMP players are about 33% larger than UT -- I think the XMP Raptor is actually larger than the Onslaught tank thing.

Major-Lee-High
19th Aug 2004, 06:37 PM
Thats dumb, you guys should have scaled them down to be around the same scale as ut players. That means that the map space is smaller (even though its huge anyway) and alot of 2k4 content and user content for 2k4 would have to be scaled up to fit in utxmp maps then too right?

I suppose there could be a reason but i dont see why, it would have been better to scale the xmp stuff down to fit than leave it bigger.... that doesnt make sense. Even so, i dont think its that hard to scale things up, but then again if so its just as easy to scale them down.....

So, basically no ut2k4 maps will work with xmp then.... which is ****ing dumb, alot of maps would probably suck, but many maps for ons as and ctf etc would be great, especially when someone makes a ctf gametype or something for it...... Now if someone wants to make a ctf gametype we will have to redownload a bunch of converted maps instead of being able to just use the new gamtype or a mutator....

[DF]phalanx
19th Aug 2004, 06:39 PM
/me selects statc mesh proprties and sets drawscale to fit occordingly

Captain Kewl
19th Aug 2004, 06:58 PM
Yes, there is a reason.

Major-Lee-High
19th Aug 2004, 06:59 PM
Yeah, and the models have a scale setting too....

Ive never tried to do a full map before with unreal, but i know in radiant (older one) it messed up things alot... and still, why not do that in the full utxmp to all the assets instead of making us do it.... Instead of just using faceclassic as is with a new gametype or mut, you would have to rescale it and redownload it to use it.....

Im sure alot of people would be like screw ut maps, and i understand to a degree, but there are TONS of good user maps that would be great that will have to be needlessly rescaled to work.... Not to mention many ons maps that would fit in with xmp almost perfectly, that with a mutator to change nodes to gens and replace vehicles would make them all work with just that, while if its really scaled up like that none of them would work without being fixed and redownloaded.....

Major-Lee-High
19th Aug 2004, 07:00 PM
Yes, there is a reason.

:/

Pro^Kp
19th Aug 2004, 07:23 PM
Dammit lee if u had ur way this would just be UT2004 renamed.

Captain Kewl
19th Aug 2004, 07:39 PM
Actually, yeah, that's part of it. :P

This is foremost a port of XMP... The idea was always to take XMP and give it the support that its current incarnation won't allow, not to just make a gametype for UT2004 using UT2004 maps and models. Building it around UT2004 proper would probably mean losing a lot of the feel that XMP had with the scaling, perspective, and movement (and it's debatable as to whether UT2004 even has it right in the first place -- DE designed their levels to be played with players that were 20% larger than they eventually ended up being.)

On top of that, it would seriously stunt the process of porting all the levels over; all the staticmeshes and terrains would need to be rescaled -- which at this point isn't worth the trouble. It's just too much of a damn shame to waste all that stuff Legend put together.

Captain Kewl
19th Aug 2004, 07:46 PM
All that said -- some sort of mutator to address the discrepancies in scaling might be doable. :)

Pro^Kp
19th Aug 2004, 08:48 PM
In that case lee can write it himself :P

Nice sig btw lee is that Max Payne?

Myren
19th Aug 2004, 11:57 PM
the proper teamplay form is to have a "useless" techie (bah, whats another gasser on your map anyways!) drive, while someone else grabs the gunner chair. then you go claim the map; techie hacks, gunner shoots anything that moves. sure, technie doesnt get that many points from hacking, but they should be able to drive over a couple people, which is reward which transcends points alone.

/rag on techies, but i play one too.
Myren

W0RF
20th Aug 2004, 07:41 AM
You might be surprised how well a techie can score being a hack-monkey. It's throne-watching that is the most thankless job ever.

And yes, lee's sig is artwork from Max Payne 2.

Major-Lee-High
21st Aug 2004, 04:31 PM
In that case lee can write it himself :P

Nice sig btw lee is that Max Payne?

Na its from a stephen king book :)

And im not trying to make it like 2k4, im just trying to look at the big picture, tbh i think way to far into games and really focus on the bad parts, i mean the good things are obvous. I can understand the team wanting to speed map porting up, but if thats the only reason why then its stupid, its not like there are 100s of maps, xmp only had 6 right? and new maps are gonna be more important than getting all those 6, only 3 are really great anyway.

There are just way too many custom maps and content that would fit into xmp perfectly that will be wasted, or will have to be redownloaded.... In the long run its a bad idea imo.

Major-Lee-High
21st Aug 2004, 04:35 PM
Oh, and the maps are really the only problem, the players and guns, vehicles etc could all be scaled down pretty easy, but im not sure if a mutator could do it, i tried making something like that for 2k3 and it worked good but you couldnt crouch in the midget or giant state.... But just redownlaoded the players and stuff rescaled wont be that bad, and will allow to play in the ut gametypes, which imo would rock, cause i hate gay ass weapon pickups and the abaility to carry all the guns that ut has... Classes would make ut 100% cooler.

The biggest problem will be custom maps, not only will people make them and then find out they are too small, some people will want to make a XMP map then also use it for ONS which prolly wont work now.... And if its that easy for the mapper to just rescale then the xmp team needs to do it before release to match ut scale.

IndianPsycho
21st Aug 2004, 05:25 PM
I can understand the team wanting to speed map porting up, but if thats the only reason why then its stupid

Building it around UT2004 proper would probably mean losing a lot of the feel that XMP had with the scaling, perspective, and movement (and it's debatable as to whether UT2004 even has it right in the first place -- DE designed their levels to be played with players that were 20% larger than they eventually ended up being.)

;)

Pawnbroker
22nd Aug 2004, 09:05 PM
Sorry, I'm going to try to get back on topic here :)

EDIT: Saw the vehic thread :o I'm curious, are you guys tweaking the vehicle physics? As it is now, the Jugg is a mobile gun placement, and the Harbie is useless (except for jumping canyons!). The Raptor does take some odd bounces now and again too.

Is button switching b/t turret and driver going to be implemented?

Thanks.

Also, just to second Mr Woof, MF Techs are always among the top scorers in a server. I should know! I play one on TV. :P

W0RF
23rd Aug 2004, 07:42 AM
OMF TechTV!!!!!

"And it is Worf, madam, not Woof." ;)

Reportedly (I say that only because I am not a monkey, but I'm sure the monkeys would tell you the exact same thing) the vehicles will be the same, and handle basically the same, but because they are based in UT2K4 vehicle code, they should "grip" the road much better and not split into odd pieces, and other things those vehicles did that you probably wouldn't expect from a high-performance machine.

However, unless they have altered the Harby's weaponry in any way, expect it to remain useless. ;)

Jaybo
25th Aug 2004, 05:53 AM
Leave it as is imo, this is XMP, not 2k4 and certainly not ONS. Just my opinion

[DF]phalanx
25th Aug 2004, 07:17 AM
pfft me wants raptors that dont spin all over the place on terrain slants and sharp corners
me wants harby thats usefull to move in rather then it rolling down a hill :/

Emmet Otter
25th Aug 2004, 07:27 AM
I gotta admit, the harby was a pretty useless vehicle which people rarely use cause of its slow flying projectiles which also obstructed your view when shooting (Im reffering to the top gun) And practically no one ever used the rear gun =(

.sl0w.
25th Aug 2004, 07:57 AM
I gotta admit, the harby was a pretty useless vehicle which people rarely use cause of its slow flying projectiles which also obstructed your view when shooting (Im reffering to the top gun) And practically no one ever used the rear gun =(

Yeah, the buttcannon is very useless - would be better if the would change it with a Asmd :lol:




Btw, Jaybo - your Sig is wrong ;)

fireball
25th Aug 2004, 10:44 AM
I've used the Harbie buttgun to self-d the thing before. Otherwise, I'd like to see it do the shock-lance bounce effect. It does a lot of damage but it's friggin impossible to hit anything with it.

FurociousFa
25th Aug 2004, 02:32 PM
if the harbies rear gun could look in more directions (all besides hitting the actual vehicle) it would be a force to be wreckoned with : )

GotBeer?
28th Aug 2004, 12:52 AM
Everything is bigger in XMP 'cause we ain't no wimpy 2k4 players!

Switching driver/gunner without exiting the vehicle would be bad. Like someone said, the Jugg would be unstoppable (fire a shot, move Jugg to avoid incoming rocket/shocklance bolt, shoot again, move to avoid second volley, repeat). And can you imagine a Raptor driver switching to the gun before the Raptor even stops moving?

On new vehicles: wasn't someone a long time ago working on a vehicle based on the 4-wheeled V10 Viper engine-powered motorcycle? That could be fun, a rediculously fast but fragile 1-person vehicle.

[Lithium]
28th Aug 2004, 02:53 AM
GotBeer?'s got the right idea.