[Suggestion] Should spitfires be redeployable after a cooldown period and be deployable on vehicles?

A while back there was talk about fixing issues with turret placements, e.g. the inability to place MANA turrets on minor slopes etc.
Apart from fixing that - what if it would be possible to place spitfires on vehicles?
Thirdly, should spitfires be redeployable after a cooldown period?

Imagine drivers could e.g. place their spitfire on their lightning, or whatever. Due to their notoriously bad aim, the spitfires wouldn't provide advantages in drive-bys unless the vehicle stops. Also, due to their low HP, they would go down fast when engaged. However, they would be a mobile protection against LA etc. when the vehicle is not moving much.
I'm just thinking of this because the spitfires currently have to be re-supplied, unlike the MANA turrets. So if a armor column is on the move, this would be a means of taking that protection with them.

Regardless, I actually do think that spitfires should work like MANA turrets: i.e. not require re-supply necessarily. Instead they could simply have a cooldown of a minute or so before they can be placed again.

Hm imagine a Galaxy with dozen of Spitfires on it circling around besieged tower.

Yes, exactly like the other turret options.

That should have happened at day 1 of the spitfire, but of course people were scared of it actually being effective.

This is a PvP game. Any PvE element should be weak

It is bad enough we have leave and forget weapons like Prox Mines. Adding too much would damage the game imo

on vehicles would be hilariously OP,
but redeployable with a cooldown? yep

Read the comment that I wrote:

http://www.reddit.com/r/Planetside/comments/35eky9/two_items_i_think_need_some_looking_at/cr3tzaa


Spitfires are not PVE, they are part of PVP. Know the F***ing difference between the two.

As weak as Spitfires are now, I'd be ok with them being unlimited inventory (like MANA Turrets), and not even needing the cool down. Placing them on vehicles however...just seems dumb, so "No".

Yes one is controlled by the computer and has no manual input to where it fires

The other is controlled entirely by the player

Like I said.

Even if automated, its dictated by the player in where it goes & how effective it is.

Player placed items or abilities is part of PVP.

Unlimited: Yes
On vehicles: Dunno seems pretty silly and not useful.

That is merely a perspective. I think that if the server decides when something is in view, rotates the turret, aims, fires and reloads, it is defined as an E. This is regardless whether the player puts it in place at a possibly strategic position. The reason for me to staple it as an E and not a P is simply because it is highly autonomous for possibly a great many actions. That is why mines are still PvP (one action). A spitfire turret isn't guided by a player. A player doesn't aim the turret. A player doesn't select the targets. A player doesn't decide when to fire and when not. A player doesn't decide when it reloads. The one and only thing the player decides is the placement and can then just ignore the whole thing. The rest is something only the turret can influence. That is why turrets are PvE in my book.
Fighting alongside a turret does not make it player controlled. Yes it's effectiveness might differ. The player makes handily use of it's environment, in this case an automated turret.

Back on topic, it is a sad idea. This seems mostly aimed at being able to stand still and not get busted by infantry from behind. I'm against that, as it will dumb down tactics. If you position yourself well in a tank, you should not be free to stand and ignore everything around you. You will need to get intelligence on the position and movements of the enemy like everybody else. This includes people trying to outmanoeuvre you. There is already plenty that alerts you to their presence, you don't need an automatic bullet slinger to accomplish this.

Its not perspective, its actual game design knowledge.


Player placed turrets are part of PVP, they are not part of PVE.



Also....... Have you used the spitfire yourself?

if we were allowed to put spitfires on vehicles, they may actually be useful. imaging the raging of the c4 fairies when vehicles actually have a valid detection system against them

also, they do need to act like the ai and av turret in terms of placement

Then read up what a perspective is. You say you see it from a "game design" perspective? Well I look at it from a perspective that checks what handles those actions. In this case, all actions are controlled by an AI, with the exception of placement, and all those actions are needed to make any use of the turret. So if it wasn't clear I discard your perspective because of the above reasons, I hope it is now. You can't change my perspective unless you come with great arguments that change my ideas about who controls those actions.

And to copy your style: Player placed turrets are part of PvE, not part of PvP.

Do use the spitfire?


Have you played any other multiplayer games where turrets were used?(Such as TF2)?

Before I had a drivers licence, I have seen cars drive often. I've both been in the passengers seat and watching from outside. I could tell when a driver was driving good or bad. When they parked bad or not. A whole lot more. I always hate the argument of the "have you used it", "I have used it more" and arguments like that. You don't need to have used them to know how they work and how they perform. You can just have seen it from the sidelines and see when someone has crashed and when someone is a perfect driver.

Yes I have "used" the thing, meaning I have placed it and let it do it's work to great effect, adding to my skill. What is it for you? That I have placed the thing still doesn't mean I handle any of it's actions.

Cut the crap, Do you have the spitfire? yes or no. How long have you actively used it?

Spitfire turret still sucks terribly bad.
It's worthless.

Placing the turret on vehicle, I thing game engine won't allow it.