[Suggestion] restrict your vehicle by class

I'm sure this has been suggested half a hundred times before, but...

I don't really have any use for anything other than an engineer as a secondary in my MBT. Let us restrict who may enter our vehicles by class. It's cumbersome to lock your tank then unlock it to kick someone out, then hope the engineer near you sees you're now 1/2 before the infil or whatever you just kicked out doesn't hop right back in.

5 check boxes, each by default checked for LA, HA, engi, medic, and infil. Let us uncheck the checkboxes for classes we don't want as secondary in our vehicle.

Also, can we get reverse vocalizations for v + 5 if we're already in a vehicle? If I'm in a vehicle, I'm not going to call out "I need a ride!" or "let me hop in". If we're in a vehicle, and press v + 5, make it so we say "hop in", "need a ride?", or "I could use a secondary!"

I think it would be coolest if each soldier "plugged in" to the vehicle they were in. Like an aura you could unlock for your whole vehicle. Like if you put an Engineer in your vehicle then your vehicle gains 20% extra HP. If you put light infantry then it gives Bonus to damage. If you put Heavy Infantry it gives Big energy shield to the vehicle. Infiltrator can give vehicle speed boost.

So some peoiple would then choose to drive their Empire Specific Fighterplane with Light infantry to give their missles 20% boost to damage.

People would want to put infiltrator in the back seat of harraser for speed increase.

Tanks with HUGE defence would want HP increase driver to outlive any smaller things.

Maybe make it so the bonus for each additional infantry of the same type plugging into the vehicle is smaller and smaller. That way you dont have 8 light assualt all going into galaxy for +160% damage. Make it so max is 40% with 3 copies of same plugin solider. That way people dont load up a sunderer with ALL the same class they try to diversify instead to get tons of different bonus.

i agree to a point....

but when there are no engies around ill take any warm body as my gunner.

that said itll take as many commands to restrict classes as it would to just kick someone out of your vehicle

I'm sorry - what point were you trying to make with that statement? That it's not worth the effort to give people an option to restrict classes because it'd take "as many commands"?

I spawn a vehicle, uncheck the boxes for classes I don't want in it - it's a one time thing each vehicle spawn. Versus having to lock the vehicle to kick people out over and over and over ad infinitum.

my point is that if you have to kick people out ad infinitum, there arent engies around to begin with. what if you have to settle for whoever is around? you going to go through and uncheck specific boxes while under fire so that random medic can man your top gun?

as i said i agree with you, but at the end of the day this isnt worth dev time whether i like it or not,

I have to disagree.

Gunners are gunners, and I've seen too many people die because they thought they needed an Engineer that wasn't there over the random class that WAS there. I prefer it if tank drivers have to do something to kick them out, this means they can't prevent someone from entering when it really matters and they don't have time or the wits to open it up.

Also if you open your vehicle menu you can click on the little cross next to someone's name to kick them out. This is a lot easier than locking it and opening it again, and you can repeatedly kick them out until they get the message without ever having to close the vehicle menu.

sadly sometimes the message they get is that they need to cone back one more time to c4 you

Agree x1000. There are times where any gunner is better than no gunner, but you should be able to limit it when you have a bunch of pubbies around. Also, you should be able to lock weapons until you're ready for them to fire so randos don't ruin your stealth by firing your Halberd at a Mosquito barely at render distance.

I see your point, but the option should at least be there to lock it to certain types.

I'd rather see the option to lock gunner slots independent of pure passenger slots first.

Just because I don't want randumb gunners magdumping my Kobalt at the broadside of a barn and missing doesn't mean I'm not open to people in need of transportation to the next base, but the game currently forces my hand.

Won't they do that anyway when your vehicle is locked?

If somebody WANTS to allow another class into their MBT, then by all means. They'd have the means at their disposal. If one wants to settle for a non-engi, that's their prerogative. If one wants only engis as secondary, I think there ought to be means to enable that.

This is such a stupid waste of development time.

Get in a squad and communicate with people. Good grief you really depend on random gunners THIS much???

Just no. NO!

I've seen too many people die because the secondary doesn't have a repair gun.

"Tank drivers [...] can't prevent someone from entering". Sorry - if someone wants to enter a vehicle, they can spawn one themselves using their own nanites. Having no options at all to prevent entry of someone into your vehicle is a bit ridiculous. Until you lose it or it gets blown up, it's yours. Not communal property that people have right of access to.

I honestly prefer to have my gunner be a heavy with a striker so when ESF give me trouble he can hop out and dump a mag at him and make him go away. Hell just today i was gunning for a harasser i just hopped in as a heavy thats just what i happened to be at the time and we killed a lightning but as soon as it went down an enemy harasser engadged us i shot it until the vehicle got to red then i bailed and hit the enemy harasser with my launcher killing it and the harasser barely survived.

Honestly your idea isnt really bad but i dont think its worth the development time to make an entire system to make it so certain people cant get in rather than just kicking them all it does is make something you can already do slightly more convenient.

there already is..... the problem is you dont understand that. if its not on your your terms as is then tough titty

If your not an engineer when piloting your own vehicle you have no valid basis to complain if someone is in your gunner position and isn't an engineer, clearly if you aren't an engineer you don't care if your vehicle survives.

as for everyone driving around as an engineer expecting someone to swap to engineer jsut so you'll let them gun for you is gimping yourself of an extra set of eyes and DPS and added utility.

sure x2 engineers repair faster, but a HA with a rocket launcher can be useful, as can a medic if an ESF decides to rocket pod you to death as you are repairing while the medic is still in the gunner seat.

If you are taking fire when repairing from ground forces you are doing it wrong.

The devs should not encourage discrimination in any form, including players who think owning a vehicle gives them a right to say how others should play so they have the 'honor' of gunning in their vehicle.

a warm body is a warm body, pull engineer yourself don't expect others to care if your vehicle lives or dies.

According to my stats, I play an engineer 93% of the time. 100% of the time while piloting.

I had an HA get out once and help blow up an enemy tank with a rocket. That was the only time a non-engineer has done anything of any use outside the gunner slot. Fellow engineers, on the other hand, have been useful in a non-gunner capacity about 90% of the time.

So, there's hundreds of instances of engineer usefulness vs one instance of non-engineer usefulness in my experience. I estimate I've had engineer in my secondary 2/3, non-engineers 1/3 of the time. I've also observed, in my experience, that engineers more often than not tend to be more skilled in the secondary than non-engineers, especially the ones who predominately play engineers and pilot MBTs often themselves.

And I'm a private individual. I'm free to discriminate as I please. If I don't want somebody in my secondary, they're not going to be there, regardless of whether or not the devs were to give us the choice to restrict classes in our vehicles. And I have the right to make that choice. That's why primaries have the ability to kick people, otherwise the secondary should have equal rights to kick the primary, or primaries shouldn't have the right to kick at all, using your logic.

Kicking someone one and waiting a little while for an engineer improves survivability and halves the time to get back in the action when pulling aside for repairs. I would just honestly prefer to save non-engineers the trouble of hopping in my tank in the first place. Really, it'd be doing them a favor as well.

Make the vehicle terminal capable of switching your class but not resupplying.
Then...

Give each driver's class an effect on their vehicle, provided by their equipment or whatever plugging in.
My take on some examples:
HA: small, always enabled shield that blocks minor damage so HP is topped off despite stray bullets.
LA: Bonus to braking speed and acceleration while moving or turning, applies to vehicle and turret rotation.
Engi: 1 level of Nanite Auto Repair, cumulative with the upgrade.
Medic: Quickly regenerate own HP and shield when seated. Reduced effect in Flash, as you're drawing power from the engine etc
Infil: Reduce cooldowns on vehicle abilities.

what you do when playing legit is your own business regardless of what other's think, however no game company should implement or design features to assist or enable discrimination deliberately.

you can use the kick and lock functionality of vehicles to remove people who aren't engineers, but don't expect DBG to approve of the practice. DBG would not make such an error to deliberately facilitate or appear to approve of discrimination.

I'm a tanker myself and mainly run engineer most of the time i'm piloting as engineer, the rare times i'm not idk for the vehicle to survive other then long enough to move from A to B, i don't lock people out if they aren't engineers. if someone expects me to swap to engineer just to be a gunner for them(when they could have been engineer or run NAR) then it's their loss 2/2 is better then 1/2.

This isn't a civil rights matter, it doesn't rise to the level of unfair treatment, so I think you can quit with the rhetoric. It's not like Rosa Parks being forced to sit at the back of the bus. It would be a simple matter of giving people the option to deem whether or not a video game class has merit in their utility to them in their video game vehicle.

I'd prefer to save both myself and the other person the trouble. And I'd like to have the tools available for an issue that comes up quite often, and I'm sure there's many people who feel the same way I do when a non-engineer hops in their tank. I end up dumping the non-engineer half the time. I have to sit around to wait a bit to see if the engineer nearby sees I'm 1/2 again, and I waste both my and the non-engineer's time.

And again, it's not a matter of unfair treatment. For an apples to apples real-life analogy, it would be akin to choosing not to hire an electrician to do your plumbing. Or an office worker to do your roofing. Or a dentist to do brain surgery. As far as secondary goes, I just want the right guy with the right tool. A repair gun. It's not a matter of unfair discrimination of the likes of race, gender, orientation, religion, etc.

Classes in PS2 have tools and abilities that give them certain utility and merit. HAs aren't a race. Infiltrators aren't a gender. LAs are not a religion. There's no comparison to real-life unfair treatment/discrimination.