[Rant] Armor needs to be more restricted in operating

jerkzilla · Post by **jerkzilla** » 2007-09-21 11:28

Lucid Nightmare wrote:Horizontal stabilisation is all well and good, but it's the vertical stabilisation that's the problem. Compensating for sideways movement is easy. Not so for the vertical, especially when the tank is bouncing all over the place because it's on the move.

Currently, tanks don't even have that. Any bit would be very useful. I wish someone that knows the coding involved could tell me if it is possible without remodeling the tank.

Lucid Nightmare · Post by **Lucid Nightmare** » 2007-09-21 14:27

Suggestions people! Make a tank with a driver one bad arse piece of machinery without nerfing the gunner in the process! That's what I want to see, none of this whining ****. I have officially hijacked this thread. . .
Obey or perish!

jerkzilla · Post by **jerkzilla** » 2007-09-21 15:06

I say give him the ability to launch sharks/barracuda's with frikkin lasers on their heads!
What about some sort of countermeasure that would make the driver a very useful person to have in a tank, even while camping?
What if the main turret was the child of another invisible turret? I've noticed that while being alone in the cupola machine gun position, your aiming is not altered a great deal (tested by letting the tank drive down an irregular and bumpy slope). But this will probably take remodeling the tanks.
A DEV said something about the MG behaving differently according to the presence of the other crew men but I can't find that thread anymore since it was back during 0.5.