[T:V] Vehicles

Something like the troop carrier in Aliens where u can all jump in and be transported pretty quickly - mount a couple of AAs or something on the top to give the crew something to do and a bit of poke should anything want to stop them - perhaps space for 5 like the Havoc? Then of course once it is parked up, it deploys like a normal MPB.
 
After playing the vehicle demo (ah memories) for T1 I do concede. Vehicles in T1 were gossly effected by gravity... much more than I remember.
 
Void|deadjawa said:
not a big fan of the bomber myself. Its way too easy to shoot down and requires too many people for its function. The T2 bomber could easily be a one man vehicle and still be balanced. It was a novel concept though.
Click to expand...
On some maps the bomber isn't too useful but on others it's incredable.

Take slapdash for instance, a team can have a full setup (turrets, MPB, perhaps HoF) and a bomber can simply remove it in 2 runs. It's one of the best ways to clear a stiff defense on this map... usually it's worth it even if it only gets a single run since it can at least nock off the MPB. You probably still have LD to deal with (provided they're not blind) but 2 people to remove the rest of the defense is a good deal.

Another example would be raindance, if a team's base is raped and full bomber gets going it's ugly... complete domination, hard to get a team to do much of anything besides run around like chickens with their heads cut off.

If the bomber would work with one person it would be rediculous, you'd never be able to keep a quality flag defense on a vehicle map unless you had some serious air superiority... one run can easily kill an MPB, HoF, or a field of spike turrets, not to mention anyone else that happens to get caught. There are people that would argue it overpowered while requiring 2 people.
 
The bomber worked on any map with fog. Even if the terrain was as flat as a board you could still pull off a decent HALO drop and kill just about anything in the open. My biggest problem with the Bomber was it was just way too fast. If I couldn't get a decent lock on the thing there was no way I as going to shoot it down, not to mention the fact that after 1 or 2 passes with a bomber the pilot knows exactly where the closest ridge he can duck behind is.

Now believe me I loved the bomber for the variety it offered to the game, and in the hands of a skilled team that variety could descimate the opposition. However, overpowered is the nice way to put it. Not only could the beast descimate your defense but any rockets you shot at it we're thrown off course by a Heavy Tailgunner with an ammo pack and flares.

Since the easiest place to get an open kill was to bomb the hell out of the vehicle pad you could never get a shrike airborn to kill the sucker. If you we're going to kill it your best shot was to shoot it down, but that wasn't going to happen with a tailgunner.

My point? Since the Rocket Launcher is gone theres really no need for a tailgunner which is what I want... so I have no point... damdit...
 
Rigel said:
My biggest problem with the Bomber was it was just way too fast. If I couldn't get a decent lock on the thing there was no way I as going to shoot it down
Click to expand...

from what i remember of t2 it was easy as hell to get a lock on things.
 
i can only think of one map where bomber is a real nuisance and that is slapdash (in base i mean).


and even in that case it needs a skilled crew + one shrike escort to be effective..
 
Rabid Poop said:
from what i remember of t2 it was easy as hell to get a lock on things.
Click to expand...

It is, but its also easy as hell to shake a lock if it was ever acquired. Also in a high fog map you don't see the thing coming in the first place.
 
...? I'd love to know how you get a lock on something you don't see.

*get image of a HO waving his RL through the air hoping to randomly get a lock*

Teehee
 
youd be surprised how well that works, although its easier for missiling where you know a base turret should be, you can "follow" vehicles that go out of sight guessing where they'd pop again, for maps where the fog range is lower than the missile range it works perfectly.
 
Rigel said:
The bomber worked on any map with fog. Even if the terrain was as flat as a board you could still pull off a decent HALO drop and kill just about anything in the open. My biggest problem with the Bomber was it was just way too fast. If I couldn't get a decent lock on the thing there was no way I as going to shoot it down, not to mention the fact that after 1 or 2 passes with a bomber the pilot knows exactly where the closest ridge he can duck behind is.

Now believe me I loved the bomber for the variety it offered to the game, and in the hands of a skilled team that variety could descimate the opposition. However, overpowered is the nice way to put it. Not only could the beast descimate your defense but any rockets you shot at it we're thrown off course by a Heavy Tailgunner with an ammo pack and flares.

Since the easiest place to get an open kill was to bomb the hell out of the vehicle pad you could never get a shrike airborn to kill the sucker. If you we're going to kill it your best shot was to shoot it down, but that wasn't going to happen with a tailgunner.

My point? Since the Rocket Launcher is gone theres really no need for a tailgunner which is what I want... so I have no point... damdit...
Click to expand...
It's quite rare for a team to not have a shrike or two in the air at any given time unless they are raped so bombers can't own someone unless they're the 3rd wave or so. However, even against a full defense they are useful since they'll get a run or maybe 2 with escort.

Either way though you can still get a bomber down without a base, a single light discing it can often cause a big problem for it and you'd have to be pretty owned to not have anything better than that to shoot at it on a vehicle map.
 
Personally, i thought that the bomber was the best team oriented vehicle in the game, and was possibly the best balanced, though it could have used some tweaking.

But its really pointless to hope for another iteration of the bomber in Vengeance. If there are only going to be two arial vehicles my bets settle on them being an APC, possibly with a turret or gun that the pilot can control, and a light scout craft. I only hope that they bring back the Tribes 1 ability to toss mines and grenades from your craft while flying it. At least that way you could dive bomb an enemy gun or lay mines across a field quickly.

But who knows. Maybe they will loadout one or all of the arial vehicles with bombs.
 
They sure beat the hell out of the T1 Vehicles, none of which are of any actual use aside from quick transport for those who don't want to risk discjumping.

But the T2 vehicles aren't all that great either. The gravbike, the tank, and the bomber are just fine, but the MPB takes more punishment than it should, the shrike is damn near impossible to control, and the havoc is self explanatory.

I REALLY hope the T:V vehicles make up for the flaws in both T1 and T2.

Also, I've only seen two of the vehicles, both of which happen to be ground based--are there going to be any aerial vehicles, or will we be stuck with ground huggers?
 
Slayer_Allen said:
What terrifying chain of events led you to that conclusion?
Click to expand...
Its too damn sensitive for me, 50% of the time I usually crash into something during dogfights, flag runs, etc.

I usually just use it to get from one place to the other, rip a sensor or two apart, or give it the the flag bearer. Everything else I have no problem trying to control. I understand that the Shrike was made for high speeds and easy maneuverability, but I think they made it TOO maneuverable. Either that or I'm a lousy pilot.
 
What im looking forward to.

I really am looking forward to a decent Single seated Air vehicle like the one in tribes 1. Now of course it needs to be alittle balanced, not like there is a vortex at the core point sucking it inward or so you cant look straight down etc. I loved LOVED flying around in tribes 1 piloting was like my second favorite things. I personally think the vehicle should impliment some strategy.


Just MO
 
Nomble said:
I understand that the Shrike was made for high speeds and easy maneuverability, but I think they made it TOO maneuverable. Either that or I'm a lousy pilot.
Click to expand...
I think it is probably the second option.
And BTW, you can change the sensitivity.
 
Nomble said:
They sure beat the hell out of the T1 Vehicles, none of which are of any actual use aside from quick transport for those who don't want to risk discjumping.
Click to expand...

The T1 vehicles were fine, they just weren't the same thing as T2 or BF1942, you didn't need them to succede. The game could have played beautifully without them. We're just used to vehicle dependency now, back in the day these were the best things since sliced bread. Could T1 vehicles have been better? Yeah, but they could have been a hell of alot worse.
 
Nomble said:
Also, I've only seen two of the vehicles, both of which happen to be ground based--are there going to be any aerial vehicles, or will we be stuck with ground huggers?
Click to expand...
No, you've seen one vehicle, and one static model from the prototype.
 
Back
Top