balance tanks

"Magriders require more startup skill" and "99% of the players touching vehicles become dumb"

1. Most of the weapon listed have a ~.3 to ~.5 difference between Q4(100+br) and all BR that uses that gun, but ok, keep pushing your narrative.

"AP is overall superior to HE and HEAT, but people assume you are instantly crushed the moment you go up against an AP tank"

2. Don't be stupid, the skill gap have to be quite huge if you expect an HE tank to beat a AP tank. Even if you, somehow on a regular basis beat AP lightning with your HE shells, balance shouldn't be centered around one outlier. 12 infil with explosive xbow can kill MBT without any counterplay, doesn't mean its efficient.

"Shouldn't the Magrider, outnumbered as it is, be even weaker? But it isn't! The stats clearly tell us that the Magrider is barely behind, and we've only looked at the primary canon so far!"

3. 10.20 P2-120 AP vs 4.79 FPC vs Vanguard. Q4

8.63 Titan-150 AP vs 5.54 FPC vs Prowlers. Q4


Yea buddy, literally twice as many and 60% more kills is barely behind.

Here is what I got for top gun stats.

Prowler's Death: VS Sauron 2.49(2.59) VS halberd NA(NA) Aphelion VEX-4H 1.24(1.33)

NC Enforcer 2.22(2.36) NC halberd 2.26(2.50) M96 Mjolnir NA(NA)


Magrider: TR Vulcan 2.67(2.96) TR Halberd NA(NA) GateKeeper 2.60(2.66)

NC Enforcer 1.69(1.69) NC halberd 1.77 (1.84) M96 Mjolnir NA(NA)


Vanguard: TR Vulcan 2.16(2.39) TR Halberd NA(NA) GateKeeper 2.89(2.88)***

VS Sauron 2.28(2.44) VS halberd NA(NA) Aphelion VEX-4H 1.23(1.30)

*All Rank(Q4)
**NA means I do not see in the top 23 of the vehicle's death. So assume less then 1.2, which is the lowest ranked.
*** Only weapon I where Q4 is lower, testiment to how easy this weapon was to use.

Data pulled from http://ps2oraclestats.com/monthly-vehicle-deaths/. 6 months old but no major changes except to gatekeeper.


As you can see, beside the overperforming gatekeeper, which got gutted, Mjolnir got buff in december, Aphelion neutral nerf/buff in october. Most the guns are within range of each other ~.5.So your point in where the top gun count so much, well here is the ****** data.

You can see the staggering difference between the AP main weapon but not so much for the top guns.

P.S. Demigan: if you make another wall of text base on emotion and baseless stat("90%of magrider use FPC"???) without giving a source, I'll make another forum post dedicated to the data, so people can judge for themselve, might seem arrogant of me but at least it will get pass your filibuster.

This doesn't even mean anything for my argument. I'm talking about startup skill, you are talking about Q4 capabilities.
Besides, you pointing out that Q4 BR has only a tiny difference proves once again that I'm right. Because remember: Magriders are pulled less and more often outnumbered, and still they manage to almost break even.

As mentioned, most players do full-frontal attacks where they trade shots. Anyone who doesn't can beat the opposition with HEAT and HE. And I'm not talking about MBT's vs Lightnings, because a 1/2 HE MBT can simply overpower the AP Lightning in a full-frontal showdown with maybe the exception of the Magrider, I'm talking about an HE MBT (and even a freaking HE Lightning) engaging enemy MBT's while not doing full-frontal attacks but using their brains occasionally. HE/HEAT vs AP is far from a done deal.

Are you really that stupid?
I'm talking about per tank. You kept telling everyone how few Magriders were being pulled, I then used that number to calculate how big a % the Vanguard had if it had a similar amount of tanks on the battlefield as the Magrider, and using that the Vanguard barely kills more Prowlers.

Ofcourse, that goes right over your head.

As you clearly can't see, the lower amount of Magriders pulled heavily changes the amount of kills it can make, so using pure "% of kills the Magrider makes" is a giant flaw. You need other stats, such as KPH, VKPH, Uniques, usage time etc etc to get even an idea of what the actual balance is between the MBT's.

I'm not talking about DPS. I'm talking about kills etc from Dasnfall... Sorry should have been more clear.

You might note that i was informed that my information was dated but i did to in game testing and found that the difference in ttk against a vangaurd was only minimally different.

The reason i've not taken into account the dodging of the MBTs is because both the prowler and the vangaurd are terrible at dodging. most MBT battles between the two in game are going to be front to front at about 50-150 meters.
Both the Vangaurd and the prowler are nearly identical when it comes to accuracy. additionally, when you start taking the driver's skill into account the vangaurd has a distinct advantage in alpha damage as it has to maintain its sights on target for 2 shots rather than one. yes missing 1 shot with the vangaurd is much more punishing than the prowler but vangaurd drivers can take that extra time to line up the shot. especially with the long 4 second reload (3.5 when maxed).

The stability when shooting usually goes to the vangaurd as it is slower and thus takes less effect from changes in terrain. unless of course the prowler is locked down. at which point its not moving and the stability is better, but its easier to hit.

Dodging capabilities if you must go to the prowler only because of its forward moving speed alone. however if you assume the driver of the vangaurd is any good at the game he is going to just lead the target.

What makes the prowler "OP" is the same thing that makes it extremely under powered.

The first problem is that the prowler's special ability is extremely situational and punishing if used incorrectly. where as the vangaurd's main ability is just a straight up benefit. making the prowler require more skill and thought while using. Magrider is kind of situational. however many magrider drivers dont use magburner and instead run fire-suppression which is a lot like vangaurd shield in its use.

Second is consistency. both the magrider and vangaurd have only one drop curve to be comfortable with per weapon. Prowler has two. one for lockdown. one for mobile. This causes obvious problems for less experienced players, which until fairly recently i considered myself among (i main infiltrator so i didn't pull many MBTs until i needed sundy kills for white cammo). This causes obvious problems of missing more shots for prowler drivers.

Thirdly is base tank-ability compatability. The prowler is a very consistent base (its front armor and side armor are approximately the same size) which makes it just as easy a target on all fronts. in addition to being the fastest MBT is is also the only one with an offset Main gun, which can be either a benefit or a drawback ( you can have less or more of the tank exposed when locked down depending on where you are). But what is the point of having the ability to sit still for the fastest tank?
The vangaurd however is clearly a frontline charger. slow and able to soak up a lot of damage. its side armor is long yet its front and back armor are narrow making it most optimal to face the enemy directly. in addition to the stronger directional armor. the vangaurd also has a shield making it immune to damage for 6 seconds which greatly benefits both experienced and new players with minimal punishment for misuse. making it the easiest, most intuitive tank to use.
The magrider however is an odd tank. it is hard to tell exactly where the front side and rear armor begin and end. its essentially a floating hockey puck. but its ability to strafe in addition to its fixed cannon makes it excellent at taking advantage in cqc battles. and its special ability can be use to quickly engage or disengage enemies much faster than the other two tanks. however its abnormal controls make it difficult for new players.

Finally the cert tree. all 3 of these tanks are equals when it comes to weapon certs so i wont talk about that. but when you talk about special ability certs. the vangaurd clearly is superior.
at rank 1 the vangaurd shield absorbs 2000 damage over 6 seconds and recharges in 60 seconds (or 66 seconds if the recharge starts when the shield is finished being used) the only thing that improves with additional certs is regen time (5 seconds per rank)
at rank 1 the prowler only recieves as 12% reload speed benefit. yet the projectile velocity is increased to its maximum potential. with each rank the reload speed increase goes up an additional 12%. making the prowler have to max out its ability to use its maximum benefit, even in a brief encounter.
The magrider has the same problem as the prowler except with fuel and regen rate.

joke: wait he said balance right? you heard him guys nerf them into the ground make it so they fire like a wet noodle [that's how a desiccator shoots, btw, like a wet noodle] and that they can be killed by an LMG, there we go balanced

I did note, that's why I also pointed it out. And while it will still stay minimally different, you probably forgot weapon-specific damage: http://planetside.wikia.com/wiki/Vehicle_armor_and_damage_resistance
Look in the table below the one with the directional armor and you see the amount of weapon-specific damage resistances. MBT's have a 100% resistance against small-arms fire for instance, making them immune to small-arms fire. They also have a -100% resistance against AV mines, meaning they take twice as much damage. So this table is kinda important for calculating some damages.

A lot, yes, but definitely not all. Also you can make people miss at almost any range, even when you are broadsiding with the Vanguard.

This entire block of text is useless.
First you say that the Vanguard and Prowler have nearly identical accuracy (Vanguard AP: 47%+/-8%, Prowler AP: 43%+/-8%). Then you say that taking driver's skill into account the Vanguard suddenly has an advantage? How is that possible if the accuracy is similar anyway?
And considering that the accuracy is almost the same, the Prowler wins out due to his higher DPS for the same amount of hits, because it can put out more hits and misses in the same amount of time, and as you mentioned missing a shot with the Vanguard is more punishing. Also a Vanguard will take more time and care aiming, because if your enemy changes direction near the end of your reload, not an uncommon occurence, you don't want to miss your precious shot, meaning extra time taken before the shot comes, giving the Prowler even more time to shoot it's shells as it's far less punished and even more rewarded for simply firing ASAP.

Newsflash: You can drive Prowlers at similar speeds as Vanguards by tapping the forwards button instead of holding it.
Stability depends on the terrain and how you approach it, rather than the speed (besides ofcourse that Mythbusters already proved that going fast over bumps will have a more stable effect than going very slowly). The Vanguard suffers more from small dips on it's sides, as there's less chance his sides will find stability on a rise in the landscape, the Prowler suffers more from small rises as it's larger frame means it picks up more uneven terrain that goes upwards, but can ignore more dips in the terrain that go downwards. So it really depends on the terrain, and if the average unevenness of the terrain goes upwards or downwards.

"but skilled players will always hit" is both plain wrong and not an argument. Besides, if you look at the accuracy ratings of the highest top of the top players you see that they've got a 70% accuracy. That's wonderful, but that's also 1 in 3 shots missed for the best of the best. Consider that the average is 1 in 2 shots missed and "skilled players always hit" becomes even less of an argument: No matter how skilled the skilled players are, the average player will have a larger effect on the battlefield because there's so many more of them doing battle.

Come again? Because the Prowler has massively high DPS, the highest speed and two shots to spread it's DPS over rather than one it's UP? Did you even proofread that?

The Prowlers special ability is situational, and still the Prowler is a beast. Imagine if the Prowler had anything near that of the Vanguard?
And I already mentioned that the Vanguards shield is omniversally useful and incredibly powerful, and yet it still barely manages to kill more MBT's! Just look at the Magrider. For every 2 Magriders there are 3 Vanguards... And yet each Vanguard manages to barely kill the same amount of MBT's as each Magrider does.

Also, I've never ever seen a Magrider use fire suppression in all my years of playing.

The second drop-curve of the Prowler is "almost straight". Also let's not forget that you have 2 shots and a massive fire-rate. Even if it takes you 4 shots to dial in the drop curve once you deploy, you are still blowing your opposition away. It's childsplay getting the drop right on a Prowler. That's part of the whole advantage I pointed out to you in the first place! Ofcourse, why let that get in the way of making weird comments eh? Keep at it!

The speed is used to get in and out of battle fast, but especially to get around enemy flanks. Then once you've found a good position, deploy and murder your enemies. If someone threatens to attack you the Prowler has the speed and maneuverability to get out of there. At the same time the deploy mode is barely a disadvantage: You can instantly redeploy and start driving, so even if you do get caught while deployed, you would have been caught regardless of the deploy or not.
So yes, deploy is a massive advantage on especially the Prowler... If you think for more than two seconds about it.

"frontline charger", good one.
The Vanguard can soak up damage, and it needs to because it's behind in everything else. Charging the front is suicide most of the time in a Vanguard, because all it means is that you get more guys focus-firing at you, killing you faster. And 6 seconds "immune" is highly overstated, since it's 2000 health extra an a single focus-firing 2/2 MBT can break your shield, now imagine if more tanks are focus-firing at you because you singled yourself out by charging the frontline...
As for "minimal punishment for misuse", the Vanguard shield gives you one of the worst punishments for misuse: A lengthy cooldown and having to rely on the worst MBT chassis in the meantime.

Because of how directional armor works it doesn't matter how it looks.
If you stand behind it and you hit it's side, it's still a rear-hit. If you stand in front of it and hit it's side, it's still a front hit. If you stand on it's side and manage to hit the back or front, it's still a side-hit etc etc. The game only keeps track of your position relative to the frontal arc, and calculates if you are in front, beside, behind, above or below based on that.
Also I would say that the Magrider is the easiest to learn, it's controls are the closest to infantry-controls. The hard thing to learn about the Magrider is making use of it's capabilities as best as you can.

Vanguards ability is clearly superior, so why aren't it's stats superior?

I laugh at the TR who anchor after they see me pull my tank up to 1v1 them, and whine about NC having i-win shield. You are making a dumb mistake in tank fights, which ultimately ends up getting your tank destroyed. NC shouldn't suffer because of it..

Prowlers also get an extra shot every few reloads if they are sitting near an ammo tower or sundy. Thats 3 fing shots. Forget it if they are anchored. DBG STILL has not fixed this glitch, and TR abuses it all the time. Prowler OP.

Those extra shots don't do damage, so they are a hindrance due to increasing re-fire time.

The "issue" as you call it has been looked at several times and resulted in a big nerf of the vanguard shield. I don't understand why new players (I hope you are) feel they should post stuff like this before they know the vehicles properly. Plz start here:

https://www.reddit.com/r/planetsidearmor/wiki/armorpedia

That "third shot" doesn't actually do any damage to the target. All it really accomplishes is throwing off timing.

When the 3 shots glitch happens only 2 of the shots register. the 3rd or occasionally 4th does not benefit the prowler in any way.

Do people ever read other posts besides the one they are replying to? Two have replied with the same answer and are directly above your comment. I was using it in VR the other day and the damage still registered. Then again, that was VR not real game. Is there more information about this on a website?

Despite the glitch, Prowlers are still able to compete with their MBT counterparts(at least in my experience as a Prowler user), which is probably why dbg is giving TR the middle finger with the reload glitch. I'm pretty positive that if players whined about it as much as they did the Vanguard 'i-win' shield, it would have been fixed by now.

Honestly, once you dump the certs to max out each of the tanks they're the same, but at lower certs the prowler and magrider are easily overwhelmed by vangaurd... also TR top guns are Meh at best vulcan needs to be too close, gatekeeper is hard to use now... halberg is the only one really worth it. all the AA top guns are kinda crap against air on their own. IMO all the MBTs are way too easy to kill. especially for light assaults, who can take out 2 MBTs without resupplying (1 brick and a typhoon burst will kill any of them, though if the vangaurd pops shield it wont work.)

wish the prowler had a gun like the enforcer or saron that wasn't nerfed to being a spud gun...

Too many weapons given to infantry for destroying vehicles.. That is actually great argument to balance G2A, specifically for ground vehicles. Plenty of air warriors in the balance G2A thread are whining profusely in opposition because they think there will be an inevitable nerf if ground vehicle players complain enough about the imbalance.

The argument of "there's too many of it" is completely nuts. It doesn't make sense! It doesn't matter how many there are, what matters is how effective they are, how much skill is required to use them, the effort and time required to use them, the amount of skill, effort and time required to counter them etc.

For example, 99% of the weapons in the game are plenty good against infantry. Does that mean "oh deary me, there's too much that can kill infantry, let's remove 50% of it"? I mean here people are complaining that if less than 1/3rd of the weapons can just damage their skill-reducing vehicles, regardless of how effective it actually is, it's a problem. Now imagine being an infantry. Sure many AV weapons (AOE) have been nerfed against infantry, but most of them can still OHK infantry no problem.

Just look at the most effective infantry-worn AV weapons in the game. C4 for example has a hit % that shows a resource expenditure higher than the tank's cost to kill one. Add increase in time and skill required to pull it off vs the incredibly low skill required to prevent getting C4red in the first place (not to mention the nearly non-existant skill required to murder infantry with a vehicle) and C4 overall is more costly and time-consuming that pulling a tank and going on a killingspree with it. Oh, and C4 is a one-use item, while that tank can keep on giving. And that's for the best infantry-worn AV weapons. The rest is terrible because vehicles are more healthy, faster, have better range and better firepower no matter how you spin it.

So tell me, what exactly was the reason that devs used to change the balance of the game in favor of infantry? Because I'm pretty sure it was a disparity in numbers and the goal to please their playerbase that finally brought them to make the change. Everything matters if you're set on putting it that way, but there's no point in arguing for the sake of argument.

To paraphrase you, what matters is the skill needed to use them. Cover is a big variable to surviving OHKs. Your case scenario might apply to a wide open space like the frozen rivers on Esamir and the infantry is just standing there.

Debatable. With some practice, it's incredibly easy to C4 a tank, not to mention very satisfying. With a bit more practice you can pull off a 1 brick-rocklet combo while staying within the tank's blind spots. I avoid this because the tanker(s) might jump out guns blazing, (that is, once he orients himself because facing one way inside the tank and getting out facing the other way makes no sense).. The chances of dying increases if the LA has no cover or is dumb enough to not use it. Maybe you're doing it wrong.

Again, debatable, based on skill, awareness, and availability/use of cover. You can be as careful as you want to prevent your tank getting C4'ed, but your *** is grass if you don't have proxy radar and the LA is resourceful enough and uses the surroundings to her advantage. If you think it takes almost no skill to kill infantry with a vehicle, you've clearly never done the infantry vs vehicle dance around a rock or tree. It's quite humorous and action-packed for both sides.

Source, please?

On what? cardboard cut-outs? You're arguing that c4 is not as cost, time and kill effective as a tank. Why not just imagine how many 'killingsprees' you prevented? What am I reading.

If you think LAs should have a pocket big enough to stuff 40-50 C4 bricks into, I encourage you to make that request to devs. I look forward to it.

I call this one, lol I'm a vanguard.



Not saying the clip is to prove balance in anyway but I wouldn't do it with a magrider or with a prowler and expect to live. Note, I probably survive without the shield too.

Great video. The framerate and video speed almost looks like you're playing on a PS4.

The reason of "let's create a game where using vehicles and infantry is as fun as possible, rather than vehicles making infantry fights suck". Also if you are going to make a game where the gameplay of one side sucks, make sure it's the side with the least players. Consider even die-hard vehicle users like Chingles use infantry more often than vehicles, it makes sense to put infantry-combat first and focus on vehicle combat second.
That doesn't mean that vehicle combat is instantly off the table or is actively screwed over. Hence we've been seeing bases disappear and we are seeing vehicle capturepoints as well as PMB/vehicular bases being in progress on the PTS. If you don't know why removing bases is a pro-vehicle thing look at Quartz Ridge and Indar Excavation. There's enough time and enough protected vehicle spawners to build a suitable vehicular force against the opponents, meaning more and longer vehicle fights. People actually complain about it because the fights are equalized more easily ending with endless back-and-forth battles between these bases.

That cover is massively important in my case scenario. The cover is used by the infantry, and is a requirement for them to be able to fight vehicles. Even with the cover the vehicle at worst has to be able to time his fire and lead his target to get that OHK off, in the meantime that infantryguy needs to take projectile drop into account, range, velocity of his rounds, other infantry AV weapons require you to constantly be aware of the enemy vehicle position and cone of vision so you can sneak up to him, and any time you get spotted your faster, more durable, longer-ranged and more powerful enemy will be able to stay out of your reach while shooting at you with OHK shots.
Compare that to the skill required of the vehicle user: He can mostly just sit there, take the damage while trying to lead the target and OHK him, then when it goes "wrong" he can simply drive out of the infantry weapon range. Against other targets like C4 all the tanker needs to do is spot the target. And with half the situational awareness an infantryguy needs to be able to approach you with C4 you can spot the few approaches they have to get to you and keep an eye out, murdering any would-be killer and sending them back to make that looong treck over again, costing them lots of time the infantry could have spent doing other things.

All this is based on one thing and one thing alone: The pure stupidity that hits 99% of the players who touch a tank. Players in tanks barely flank, they barely keep an eye out for enemies. Of course it's easy to C4 a tunnel-visioned tank who's sitting in on spot for the entire duration of the capture and doesn't even react when the C4 fairy is getting spotted and shot at right next to him. Hell, most of these tankers won't even look up when their buddy gets C4red, and when you C4 them when you return they are still surprised!
Ofcourse, you also have those tankers who are nigh untouchable by C4. I rarely get C4red, when I do it's because I know I did something wrong or took a risk. Almost everything of the engagement is in the hands of the vehicle player. From the range to the position where the fight will take place. If you get caught by a CQC AV weapon like C4, especially when that C4 player places C4, taunts you, detonates C4 and then finishes you off with a Rocklet then it's all your own fault.

It takes 1/10th the skill to protect you against C4 as it takes to use it. Ofcourse most tankers don't even try to defend themselves. But that doesn't make C4 OP, that's like saying a knife is OP against an infiltrator who doesn't move and snipes all day without ever looking around him.

Not debatable. Cover is a requirement to pull it off. The skill to prevent players from using C4 on you is far lower as it relies on simply spotting and then reacting. Nothing more is required. You can use situational awareness, such as simple questions of 'where does my enemy spawn, where are my allies, what roads are left to approach me unseen' to further reduce the chance of getting C4red. In the same moment your opponent needs to know where you are, where enemies spawn, where enemies move, where enemies are fighting, how to avoid those, which roads are left, where enemy vehicular reinforcements are coming from and then gauge where the least chance is to be spotted and killed. This is made easier by the masses of tunnel-visioning tanks who have only a single cone of vision: Right at the heart of your allied infantry groups.

Funny, I've done incredibly well for years and years without proxy radar. And with the new easy-mode Spitfire it is a complete no-brainer to protect your tunnel-visioning tank. Even so, things like "situational awareness", "move once in a while", and "don't be an idiot" seem to be very low on any tankers to-do list.

And I have done the infantry-dance. And you know what? While it's pretty hard to kill the infantry guy, that infantry guy makes zero chance to kill you unless you give them that chance. The same goes for everything else with C4ring or infantry AV weapons.

http://stats.dasanfall.com/ps2/item/432/hp=Demigan&ho=0Hhh

Yes it says "Demigan" in the title but since my accuracy is 26% and the average accuracy given on the page is 23%. So I looked it up through another character to prove that displayed are the average accuracies of all C4:
http://stats.dasanfall.com/ps2/item/432/hp=BoopTheSnoot&ho=TAW1

Infantry, duh.

What kind of tangent is this? I don't ask for 40 to 50 C4 bricks, I don't ask for more C4 bricks in general. Ofcourse, you have to try and put that in my mouth. Any reason why you are trying to do that?

So... Just because you kill an already damaged target, who's fighting a different enemy, by destroying the mines he's standing on, and then being able to murder a 1/2 basilisk Prowler, who's also already damaged as evidenced by the Phoenix missile as well as the speed with which it is destroyed, suddenly the Vanguard is OP?
Considering the situation, you would have been able to do it in a Magrider just as easily. In fact, you would have finished that second Magrider faster as you would have been able to get behind it.