Boosting Tank HP doesn't help Infantry vs. Tank. But it does create a host of other problems

In no particular order



- MBT v Lightning balance - Lightnings will be much less viable against tanks due to the massive change in rear armor values. DPS isn't changing - MBTs already out DPS Lightnings significantly. In contrast lightnings rely on getting behind tanks and doing a lot of damage very quickly before the MBT can effectively respond. Now the TTK vs. MBTs has been increased substantially, leaving Lightnings at a great disadvantage.

- MBT v MBT - The Magrider is a bit rubbish right now. Now the TTK of all tanks has been increased dramatically - Which means the Prowler's advantages in damage per volley, reload, and velocity are exacerbated. Vanguards may also have problems, here. The Prowler has considerably better DPS than the other tanks under ideal circumstances - Hence the increased tank HP gives them a greater advantage in tank vs. tank combat as they kick out an ever increasing amount of damage.

- Prowler - This is a substantial nerf to the Vulcan. I haven't checked the exact values but I don't believe the Vulcan can kill a tank with one upgraded magazine anymore. I don't believe this change will effect the Saron and Enforcer to the same degree - Neither relies on burst damage to the same extent as the Vulcan

- Substantial nerf to all AV secondaries

- Liberators - The tank HP boost is a substantial nerf to the Dalton. The Dalton is already pretty lackluster. This just makes that problem worse

- Liberators - Massive soft nerf to CAS30 Tank Buster - Tank Buster will no longer be able to kill tanks with one upgraded magazine

BUT

It doesn't actually help any against infantry. The problem isn't really 1 tank vs. 1 HA. It's that ten HAs can hold off any amount of armor from the top of a tower. Tanks are still going to get focused down instantly by ATGMs, AV missiles, and Lancer fire from far, far outside their effective range. Even a substantial boost in HP doesn't matter - The sheer burst DPS that a group of infantry can spit out will easily compensate.

I would suggest keeping tank HP where it is and giving them default smoke, a system to shoot down incoming missiles, and 4X+ zoom along with coaxial MGs to help them deal with distant infantry.

The one clear improvement is that Tanks will be substantially less vulnerable to Lolpods. An ESF can still kill an MBT in one pass but they need to make sure every rocket hits. Skyguard lightnings will especially benefit from this.

TLDR; Tank HP boost will make badly upset the balance between MBTs, Lightnings, and Liberators while providing little if any advantage against infantry, where the real problem lies. Please consider other options to make tanks better able to survive against infantry without disrupting vehicle vs. vehicle balance.

I worry that yet another nerf to the liberators will cause another problem.

It's no longer going to be profitable in terms of time on target and score per minute to target tanks with the nerf to the tank buster/daltons. At this point people are going to go back to farming infantry and then people will complain AGAIN that the lib is OP. If this results in any more nerfs to the liberator using the liberator against ground targets is going to be almost unviable.

Currently it's easy to drive off a liberator with 2-3 bursters unless the gunner is good. Most pilots will back off to avoid taking more damage than they can afford to.

Please, don't nerf liberators again.

My biggest issue with the lighting is how it's just the MBT light. Even if you made the MBTs require 2 players it's still just an MBT light which I don't think is good design and makes the lightning just not that attractive to use.

The lightning is not just a one man version of an MBT, it's a fast attack vehicle/support vehicle. Why doesn't it play to those strengths better? The main gun is perfect for fast attacks because it's a 6 round burst that covers a larger area making it more effective for moving attacks. The Skyguard makes it a great support vehicle too.

The problem lies with the other 3 turrets, they are just shrunken MBT turrets. That's boring design. Why can't we have more variety with the lighting? How about flamethrower lightning or a AI Phalanx lighting (slap the AI turret that defends bases on top of the lightning). How about a light mortar lightning? What about a lightning with a walker and 4 seats in the back that can protect 4 infantry or 2 maxes in a covered space?

It's just boring right now.

The Lightning is not meant to be equal to MBT's.As it was in PS1, the Lightning is supposed to be a fire support vehicle, not an MBT.

The Vulcan will still outdamage the Saron, Enforcer and Halberd at its effective range by a large margin... provided there are even any Vulcan Prowlers kicking around. Either way, it counts as an even-handed nerf to AV secondaries.

The Lib, in general, was already in desperate need of a buff, maybe this change will force it.

And i dont run into many situations where i get lock on spammed to death by 30+ Annihilators, and i fought my way up Quartz Ridge canyon in my Magrider during an alert on Indar today.

And at any rate, theres still several situations where the increased armour would have been beneficial.

And im hardly going to shed a tear due to a nerf to lolpods. In fact, every time i hear about it i sip some tea and look smug.

As far as I know, the buff was only to resistance against specific weapons. Yes, they are able to do that. Battles between tanks should remain about the same.

I see a trend here.

First, the "elite" would like to force the solo players to use only the Lightning.
And then, they would like to remove the AP and the HEAT turrets from the Lighnings.
I love these guys ;-)

Think the "tanks are useless need buffs ASAP" chants are a little overblown. Routinely go on a 10... 15.. 25 killstreak whenever I pull a Lightning or a Vanguard and they are only moderately certed. I imagine good tank drivers still go on 40:1 killstreaks all the time.

SOE best be careful with blindly handing out armor buffs or things could get out of hand again like they were during launch. Would have been better off focusing their attention on balancing the AV MANA Turret and Rocketpod TTK to the rear first then taking it from there.

Please for the love of god remember that there is now an AP resistance value that will affect dalton shots and a host of other weapons. Dont go all gloom and doom for the ES AV weapons too soon

By this I mean AP weapons > general use weapons like HEAT and Zephyr

I guess that it means that if you want to play tank hunter with your lightning you have to go with the AP rounds. So if you did it with viper or skyguard or whatever you will struggle to keep up. Viper was the best for this before due it's high dps.

Difference between prowler and other tanks, meh. Difference between an AP prowler and other tanks with HEAT, oh my. But AP Prowler in lockdown already had those guys running and hiding. But I don't think that lockdown HE will out dps an AP magrider. So in the balance I think that this is not great for the bulk of people who use prowlers for anti infantry as they will be more threatened by tank hunters.

The resistance to AP rounds is being lowered such that AP rounds will kill in roughly the same amount of time/rounds before and after the change. This applies to: Any tank gun with AP in its name, Phalanx AV turrets, and the Dalton. So, the Dalton isn't getting a nerf, but the CAS is. Lightning pilots will need to use the AP cannon to be equally effective at killing MBTs and other Lightnings.

Basically, it's a nerf to all AV weapons that aren't AP, but only when used against MBTs and Lightnings, which were already suffering.

I just don't see how that could be a bad thing. I see how you could argue that this change won't help much against infantry, but the only place anything is getting a nerf is against MBTs, and for anything that wasn't already beating the **** out of tanks, i.e. not infantry or ESFs, it just requires actually using the AP weapon instead of using HEAT for everything.

Then most of my concerns are invalid. The only remaining concern would be the CAS30 getting a soft nerf that it doesn't really need.

I did not know about the separate AP resist. That being teh case I agree that it isn't a bad thing, and will generally help be an improvement. Just how much it helps against infantry remains to be seen, i suppose.

Can we confirm this, though? On public test server the Dalton currently requires 3 more rounds to kill a tank than live.

Not quite sure what the status is on test re your test with dalton. Yesterday I tested Saron as well and that did reduced damage despite it supposedly being an AP weapon. If Saron and Enforcer had more damage than Halberd it would an, interesting, balance situation. And then there is Vulcan which should be armour penetrating but I think has it's own class of damage vs armour.

Yes it seems to have its own class.

Vulcan does not seem adjusted for AP, and I'm guessing neither are other secondaries. Only thing that adjusts back to old values so far that I've seen is the AP main gun.

So its going to make having an AP main gun a much greater value, which sounds about right.

If a fully crewed tank with a HEAT primary and a Halberd/Vulcan secondary can out damage a 1/2 AP tank then I suppose it's no big deal in terms of theory. But it's not always easy to convince gunners to stay in your tank because what they are doing is just as valuable as what you are doing. So if I am controlling an AP turret and they can see me tearing a tank to pieces and they are plinking away at it with a non AP vulcan that isn't much use against anything other than vehicles then it may not sound about right.

http://www.reddit.com/r/Planetside/..._429_updates_stronger_tank_armor_gu08/c9pmv4c

1. This is not a buff so much as further distinguishing AP hits vs HE hits.

2. Serious MBT buffs are generally flawed if not accomodated with anti-spam adjustments such as lengthening spawn timers and increasing resources.

Currently MBTs are spammed because they are weak, relatively cheap, and universally available. They are disposable and dominate zerg traffic jams. If you want tougher MBTs, they also have to be less spammable.

Yet another case for distinguishing MBTs from lightnings by making them crewed and tougher, while keeping lightnings 1-man light tanks.

I think there's too much drama about this armor buff. It's meant to counter the overabundance of anti-vehicle weapons that have been introduced in the last months: stryker, lancer, AV Turret and blah blah blah. And don't foget that GU08 will also introduce new extremly effective anti-vehicle weapons for Max Units.

Then, again, what are we talking about? According to players test it looks like we will need something like 1 more rocket on front / side armor and maybe 2 rockets more on rear. Doesn't sound that terrible.

Personally I'm a hard core Lightning user and I don't see so many problems, beside the fact I'll be less effective against MBT, but that's working as intended.

Based on what we've heard so far, the Magrider is likely to be hit pretty hard by this. The Mag's maingun DPS (and especially effective DPS after clearance and velocity issues) is so poor that the Saron does most of the heavy lifting when it comes to killing enemy tanks. If it doesn't get the AP resistance bonus....ouch.

Nine shots with the PC to kill a Vanguard through its front armor, six with the FPC. Three FPC shots to kill an MBT from behind, versus four for the PC. Yeah, if you're gonna be fighting enemy armor you're gonna want FPC + Halberd/Saron.