Armor Driver Changes?

Post by **Exel** » 2007-04-05 16:05

NavalLord wrote:Makes it more realistic having to input the commands. Rather then flying around with your mouse. However, a joystick would be the most realistic. (I think the M1A2 uses a joystick to control the turret. I have no clue, I'm just making stuff up. Anyone been in an Abrams that can enlighten me?)

The controls on most of the tanks are more like hybrids between steering wheels and joysticks, or in the Challenger 2's case a hybrid between NES and PSone pads. So if you want a more realistic feel, use a joystick or a game pad, or better yet, buy the real deal. Meanwhile a mouse control is far more realistic than an awkward keyboard control.

causticbeat wrote:because its a heavy *** tank gun, not a twitchy little machine gun.

You'd be surprised. With power-assisted controls you can literally swing the gun around with just your pinky finger.

I'd recommend lowering your mouse sensitivity for tanks to get more accurate aim with the 'heavy *** guns', or use a joystick if the mouse just doesn't cut it for you.

Copy_of_Blah · Post by **Copy_of_Blah** » 2007-04-05 16:45

Fishw0rk wrote:Hmm but one can adjust key sensitvity in the options, so wouldnt that affect WASD turret movement as well?

I wasn't aware of this. Perhaps you can.

Post by **eggman** » 2007-04-05 17:07

Fishw0rk wrote:Hmm but one can adjust key sensitvity in the options, so wouldnt that affect WASD turret movement as well?

You can adjust mouse sensitivity, not key sensitivity. I dunno if using shift would work.. i doubt it... shift aka sprint is applied to engine power output and there is no engine on turret rotations.

There is a speed an accelleration factor to turret rotation. I'd like to see us get the turret rotation timings accurate.

But my expereince with tanking in WWIIOL (which imo was a really decent WWII era tank sim) and in Steel Beasts was that you really needed to have a fune tuning keyset (slow rotation) to be effective with keyboard commands and turret rotation.

There may be some other weird an heinously time consuming way around that (like having a second dumm turret that moves the first one that uses a different set of kjeys for a much slower rotational control) but er.. those are the kinds of things that can chew up a ton of time and often not produce the desired results. I'd rather we get mortars in game first

Jay · Post by **Jay** » 2007-04-05 18:40

'[R-DEV wrote:eggman']I'd rather we get mortars in game first

Hurah for mortars!

Tanks are fine IMO, but then again I dont really know anything about tanks (or war for that matter). TBH, I'd prefer to see mortars than WSAD tank turret movement!

Hurah for mortars!

NavalLord · Post by **NavalLord** » 2007-04-05 18:50

WWIIO was a great WWII tank sim. It would have been better if you could use two joysticks at the same time. It would be far more realistic having each stick control a track.

Post by **Exel** » 2007-04-05 20:49

'[R-DEV wrote:eggman']
There is a speed an accelleration factor to turret rotation. I'd like to see us get the turret rotation timings accurate.

Well now that you mention it...

Shouldn't be a problem, really. Forgotten Hope had tank turret speeds capped to their real-life values in BF1942 so unless EA has given us less to work with in that regard with BF2, it should be possible.

Remembering off the top of my head, it takes 9 seconds for the turret to do a full 360° turn in Leopard 2 at full speed. Same for Abrams, and more or less the same for every other modern MBT, ballpark accurate.

So the math is simple, we just need to figure out a way to code it.

Copy_of_Blah · Post by **Copy_of_Blah** » 2007-04-05 20:59

causticbeat · Post by **causticbeat** » 2007-04-05 21:29

WASD = fast turret
UHJK = slow turret?

Post by **Exel** » 2007-04-05 21:40

causticbeat wrote:WASD = fast turret
UHJK = slow turret?

Mouse = as-you-want-it turret

Guerra · Post by **Guerra** » 2007-04-05 22:40

'[R-DEV wrote:eggman']The commander position is buttoned up and uses an electro optical display. He can switch to the .50 cal gunner position, which is an unbuttoned position and has no tank driving control, but most of his work will be done from a buttoned up position.

Do you mean to say that tanks will only be 2 man operated? Because I like to have the commander/driver, the gunner and the machine gunner on top.

Post by **dbzao** » 2007-04-05 23:17

#1 commander/driver
#2 gunner
#3 cupola gunner

=*CLA*=StudMuffin21 · Post by **=*CLA*=StudMuffin21** » 2007-04-05 23:29

EDIT! I was stupid...my apologies. Didn't see their was more than one page.

Leo · Post by **Leo** » 2007-04-05 23:51

Excuse me if I missed it in this thread, but is thermal vision for verifying hits planned or is it impossible, or is it already in the new commander position?

[uBp]Irish · Post by **[uBp]Irish** » 2007-04-06 00:13

would it be possible that through the commanders view/CITV that the turret smoke doesnt appear? aka making it seem like we have thermal?

Post by **dbzao** » 2007-04-06 00:17

We are experimenting not having the smoke show up for the gunner and commander but still be present in 3rd person so kinda simulate the possibility of seeing through smoke in these modern tanks.

We don't promise anything

[uBp]Irish · Post by **[uBp]Irish** » 2007-04-06 02:26

beautiful

Post by **eggman** » 2007-04-06 02:42

worst case, we'll just make that smoke effect dissipate faster. it looks cool and realistic from outside the tank, just annoying how badly it blocks vision... so we might have to make it dissapear really fast if my 3p only hack doesn't work.

Tanks really are nicely improved in this version. The unzoom on reload bug is fixed, the zoom is MUCH higher, the Commander / Driver position is a much better way of doing it. Coming along nicely.

{GD}Snake13 · Post by **{GD}Snake13** » 2007-04-06 02:46

Keyboard makes sense for RO cause those tanks used hand cranks so it feels more authentic, but mouse is fine for electronic controls on modern tanks.