[Suggestion] Magrider Needs buffs

Discussion in 'PlanetSide 2 Gameplay Discussion' started by Meserion, Mar 17, 2017.

  1. Meserion

    I would argue the reason the VS is almost universally underpopped most of the time is because the Magrider is under-performing compared to other faction-specfic MBTs. Its almost like clockwork, when TR or NC (particularly on Emerald) are getting beaten in the gunfight scenario they switch over to Armor and proceed to wipe the floor with their superior numbers and better tanks; VS really have no answer as they get camped in spawn or wiped out with HE. Pulling Magriders doesn't fix the problem because unless fully crewed and are in a organized squad; its like throwing a beachball at someone instead of a baseball: it flies but lacks any real effect.

    Basically, I think the Magrider needs a buff, whether its damage or durability.

    Buffing it's damage would be pretty easy as it would not skew the gameplay of the tank as positioning would still be a requirement. I would buff the main cannon's damage as it would have the most impact overall on gameplay; I would also alter the firing arc of the main cannon; notably change the firing arc so even if the tank is up hill at a 45 degree or higher, it can still shoot down even at the top of a hill.

    As for buffing durability, I think it should be a strategic choice between MANEUVERABILITY and DURABILITY. Basically, you would have to choice between Magburn and a new defensive Module; I would propose it would be called Vanu Shield Carapace:

    VANU SHIELD CARAPACE

    Every 10/8/6 seconds of not taking damage, regenerate a charge of Shield Carapace (max 1/2/3, based on rank). While active, Vanu Shield Carapace absorbs the next hit to the front or side armor reducing the damage taken by 30%.

    EMP effects would remove all charges of Shield Carapace.

    The idea is you would still pop in and out like a regular Magrider but you would have a bit more beefiness when you do, getting rushed by enemy Armor would be the principle counter to this mechanic, as you would lack a Magburner to go up a mountain. Its a bit like a turtle or insect shell as I envisioned the Vanu Sovereignty using some strange alien shield technology that they reverse-engineered.

    I propose the new module as it would incentivize subscribing or buying boosts which would help DBG make more profits :p.
  2. Nabutso

    [IMG]

    KPH for each main gun on the MBTs:
    VS AP vkph: 14
    TR AP vkph: 17
    NC AP vkph: 15

    VS HE kph: 39
    TR HE kph: 48
    NC HE kph: 37

    VS HEAT kph: 19
    VS HEAT vkph: 7
    TR HEAT kph: 24
    TR HEAT vkph: 9
    NC HEAT kph: 19
    NC HEAT vkph: 8

    Highest top gun stats:
    VS vkph: 17 (Halberd)
    VS kph: 72 (Kobalt)
    TR vkph: 17 (Gatekeeper)
    TR kph: 55 (Kobalt)
    NC vkph: 16 (Enforcer)
    NC kph: 72 (Canister)

    "Total"s
    VS vkph: 31
    VS kph: 111
    TR vkph: 34
    TR kph: 103
    NC vkph: 31
    NC kph: 109

    Prowler is 7% below in kph vs Magrider
    Prowler is 9% ahead in vkph vs Magrider
    Vanguard is 2% behind in kph vs Magrider
    Vanguard is tied in vkph vs Magrider

    jesus ******* christ.

    What constitutes shooting down? You want it to be able to shoot at a 0 degree elevation, then you'd be asking for -45 degree traversal. This is insane. Do you have any idea what the hull down capability of the Magrider would be like? If a hill is 22.5 degrees on both sides, the Magrider could expose ONLY the tiny little ***** it has for a gun and shoot people while being entirely invisible "behind" that hill to it's targets.
    • Up x 2
  3. Meserion

    what is this kph you speak of, Also the Donald Trump meme kind of completely invalidates what you said simply because its Donald...
  4. Nabutso

    kph means kills per hour. vkph means vehicle kills per hour.

    It has become 100x more clear as why you play the gay purple ***** space alien faction. You have to go back.
    • Up x 2
  5. BrbImAFK

    Personally, I don't think that the Maggie is unbalanced as much as it is unfriendly. By that, I mean that it's hard to play a Maggie right (which would account for it's lower usage than other tanks). Now, normally a high skill floor is accompanied by a high skill ceiling, but that doesn't seem to be the case with the Maggie.

    The "best" Maggie pilots (i.e. those that stay long enough to learn to not be cert-pinatas when driving one), by your own stats, perform approximately as well as your "average" Vanguard and Prowler drivers (given that both of those tanks are easier to get into - especially since they actually perform like tanks). To me, that says that the Maggie may well be underpowered in that skilled Maggie pilots are performing at the same level as the average NC/TR MBT pilots. All that said, it's purely a perception from having played with all the tanks a bit (I'm certainly no tanker though).

    However, I want to take a little issue with the quoted bit from your post above. Doesn't it strike anybody else as odd that the VS's "best" weapons are all Nanite Systems? I'm not particularly bothered by the TR Kobalt one, because most Prowlers are camped on a hill far outside of effective top gun range (for most of the AI ones, anyway) pretending to be artillery.
    • Up x 2
  6. Nabutso

    VS's 2nd best vkph is 16 vkph, the Saron. The Vanguard's Halberd clocks in at 15 (1 below the Enforcer), while the Prowler's Halberd is only 12.

    15, 16, the difference is so tiny.

    That is not what this shows at all. These are all average numbers! Where are you getting skilled numbers vs average numbers?

    For aurax AP guns (and best top guns) only, average k/d (represents skilled tankers only):
    VS: 6.05 (AP + Halberd)
    TR: 5.25 (AP + Gatekeeper)
    NC: 5.1 (AP + Enforcer)

    For ALL AP guns (and best top guns), average k/d (represents entire playerbase):
    VS: 4.7 (AP + Halberd)
    TR: 4.1 (AP + Gatekeeper)
    NC: 4.0 (AP + Enforcer)

    So not only do 'newer' AP Magriders do better than 'newer' AP Prowlers and Vanguards, but they improve more with increased playtime (+29% vs +28%, +27.5%), albeit by only a tiny amount; likely because the Magriders find cooler places to flank from, while Vanguards learn less because of the shield crutch.
    • Up x 1
  7. BrbImAFK


    I think you're probably misunderstanding my comment - I probably wasn't sufficiently clear. I said that, in my experience, Vanguards and Prowlers are easier to use and more commonly pulled than Magriders. This would appear to be supported by the lower usage stats of the Magrider.

    Furthermore, I would expect that the number of dedicated and skilled tankers would be approximately equal across all Empires and, all things being equal, will spend approximately the same amount of time in their tanks. As such, the higher usage numbers for Vanguards and Prowlers imply that there are significantly more "casual" users than there are of Magriders. This suggests that the skill-level of Magrider pilots on average is higher than the skill level of Vanguard or Prowler pilots on average. As such, the "skilled" Magrider pilots, by your stats, are performing at about the same level as the "average" NC, and not quite as well as the "average" TR - based on that first set of kph data.

    On that note.... where did you get your data.... I can't find those figures.

    Moving on to your k/d data, I'd suggest two things..... first, that it supports my theory of "skilled" VS and "average" NC / TR (based purely on the larger number of casual NC / TR pilots). Secondly, it would seem to be a function of the Magrider's required playstyle - simply, that Maggies cannot brawl. In most long-range combat, disengaging and running away is substantially easier than in close-range combat, which would lead to naturally higher k/d's.

    Finally, I want to raise two issues. I'm not going to argue about them, because they're factually indisputable. If you want to argue, you're just wrong, and I'm not going to take the time to try to correct you. These forums have taught me better (unfortunately).
    • Relying on statistics is not a valid form of argument. "Lies, damned lies and statistics" and all that. Without a greater knowledge of the context, most statistics can be misleading or outright deceitful. Anybody who knows anything about statistics will agree with this. Hell, I only took stats for one semester at university and this was literally the first thing they taught us!
    • Auraxium (or high BR) is not an indicator of skill, merely persistence. You can Aurax a gun with a k/d of 0.1 if you keep trying long enough, and you can (as epically demonstrated) reach BR120 doing nothing but spam recon darts. A person with high BR or an Aurax is more likely to be skilled than somebody without, but persistence plays a much larger factor in both of those than skill does.
    • Up x 3
  8. Nabutso

    Wrong.

    The context being all the restrictions in place in Planetside 2, the Magrider is slightly (under 10%) worse at vehicle-vehicle combat, while slightly (under 10%) better at vehicle-infantry combat than the other MBTs. The Magrider is also significantly (20%) better at staying alive for each action it commits to.

    These are the facts, and I believe that they point towards the Magrider being on par with the other MBTs. After all, what other measurement can you use to determine how good these tanks are?

    You've already hinted at one: usage amount. But this would only reflect the player perception of their usefulness. For example, the highest K/D and KPH NC LMG is the LA1 Anchor, but, besides the default LMG, it is NOT the most used; the LA1 clocks in 45 kph the last 30 days, with the GD-22 having significantly more users, but much lower kph (29). Even comparing 1k cert cost LMGs, the EM6 nearly matches the unique user count, with significantly less kph. My perception while using the EM6 was that it was easier to use, and it felt like I had higher kph using it. But I didn't. My own stats reveal a kph of 52 vs 47 in favor of the LA1.

    There is a relationship between time spent and skill. Yes, not everyone fits perfectly on the line; but you see the data in front of you, do you think it doesn't show an increase in usefulness? Players using an aurax piece of equipment do better on average. That's a fact. No amount of outliers or anecdotes will change that.
  9. boey

    The much lesser usage time of Magriders compared to Prowlers and Vanguards is telling a lot of what is going on. There's no need to look at all the other numbers. When it comes to something big like this, a big part of this game, the MBT usage numbers should be around equal across all factions. But they are not. And that's not healthy for the game at all.
    • Up x 2
  10. Nabutso

    Perception is important. Everything should feel good. But that doesn't mean that the Magrider needs statistical buffs, because as I have demonstrated, it is on par, if not better, than the other MBTs.

    A mirror argument to this is the MCG vs the Jackhammer. The Jackhammer feels like a piece of garbage; and the MCG feels very fun! Statistically, the Jackhammer is more useful (higher K/D, higher kph), but fewer people use it because of the fun factor; and the perception of both weapon's usefulness.

    Buffing the Jackhammer - or the Magrider - may alleviate some of the negative perception of them. But it isn't the right way to go about doing it, because it ultimately leads to unbalanced gameplay. There are ways to increase the fun factor/perception of equipment without doing so, such as the upcoming vehicle handling changes.
  11. BrbImAFK

    Actually, no... you haven't demonstrated anything of the sort. Especially given your complete lack of understanding of statistics.

    This comment, in fact, completely undermines your argument.

    Everything I've read and seen says that people consider the Maggie to be fun to drive, but less generally effective than the other two tanks. So, in your example, the Vanguard and the Prowler would be the Jackhammer, and the Maggie would be the MCG. In your example, this would result in HIGHER usage of Magrider than the others because of "fun > statistics" while in fact, we see the exact opposite!
  12. Nabutso

    How do you measure the effectiveness of a vehicle?

    Everything you've read and seen does not encompass everything.

    Notice how your arguments are based on your own and several individual's opinions, while mine encompass the entire playerbase. Which is more likely to contain a sample size which better correlates to the playerbase's experience?
  13. BrbImAFK

    I make no argument that statistics are not a useful metric when combined with a suitable understanding of the background. You seem to rely on the statistics portion, and completely ignore the italics portion. This demonstrates that you have no idea how statistics work, and largely invalidates your arguments.


    No.

    My arguments are based on knowledge of the weapon statistics, experience of having used the weapon (admittedly not as much as others in some cases), interpreting the usage statistics in light of my understanding of the game (once again, you leave the italics part out) as well as reading guides and comments made by people who know more about a given weapon / vehicle / system than I do.

    Your arguments, on the other hand, seem to consist of ladling out statistics, misinterpreting them to suit your own biases, and then claiming you won, while simultaneously putting your fingers in your ears and yelling "lalalalalalalala can't hear you" whenever anybody tries to correct you.

    So.... while my arguments may not be perfect and I'm perfectly prepared to admit when I've made a mistake and somebody can prove it, I reckon I'm a damn sight more likely to be closer to the truth than you are......
  14. Nabutso

    Playing around with words won't win you any arguments.

    OK; so you're taking into account weapon statistics. Why not take into account more information, such as the game's terrain, base layouts, that sort of thing?

    Your opinion on how things works is not good enough; neither is mine.

    You insist on calling my stats outdated or non representational, yet who knows when these guides were written, or what bias the writer had.

    There is an objective way of looking at what is good in a video game. Stuff that gets more kills. Stuff that gets more kills faster. Stuff that gets more kills with less deaths. All the while, doing this better on average than other stuff.

    So, the stuff that gets more kills, kills faster, and gets more kills with less deaths, is better. Do you really disagree with that? Sure, some stuff; like the medic tool; you can't measure it that way. So, you might measure this based on score/h instead. We can objectively say that higher level medic tools are better; they heal more over time, they revive quicker; they make more score/hour because they do these things quicker.

    What is the objective in this game? Besides having fun, you need to kill the enemy. Ideally, you want to kill them in such a way that is easy for you; that doesn't take a lot of time, and that saves as many friendly as possible, so that you can push to the next base more quickly, and easily. There are objective stats we can examine based on the stats that have been gathered which will tell us exactly what is having a larger impact in those areas.

    We could look at 'hard' stats: weapon damage, rate of fire; that stuff. But no amount of 'hard' stats will give you the perfect predictor for how that piece of equipment will do. Even in our medic gun example: knowing the rate of which you will revive quicker, or the rate at which you heal quicker, will not translate 1:1 into the usefulness. Reviving at higher HP (though this doesn't exist anymore and happens at level 1) could mean all sorts of things at all sorts of ranges. Reviving from double the distance away won't mean you get twice as many revives; that sort of thing. So, we can instead, say, look at the revive/hour of medical applicator 2 vs 3; as gathered from millions of player hours spent using them. The value we get will inadvertently take into account all factors, even ones you would never think of! For example, maybe one faction likes to redeploy more than another because it has some piece of equipment they pull more often when they die in a specific way, etc...

    So, including even the usage stats (number of players), the average Magrider simply is equal to the other MBTs. The only explanation for so much fewer players using it, can partially be attributed to difference between faction populations (VS has ~90% players of NC or TR). But VS pulls 70% as many Magriders as Prowlers and Vanguards; so what about the other 22% difference?

    First, a perception that Magriders are bad. Everyone knows Magriders have slightly less HP, and slightly weaker main guns. That's a fact. This automatically peels some players off the Magrider; similar to how many players don't pull Lightnings. They assume inferiority, and so they do not use them.

    Second, a lower player population, with VS's high alert win rate, means that VS players spend certs more carefully. As a faction is more efficient with their certs as a whole, they will win alers more efficiently. You don't need nanoweave 5 all that much; you can save 1000 certs and maybe buy another Max AI gun instead, or a Skyguard. Remember, Vanu has 90% pop compared to the other factions. VS pulled 87% the Skyguards of NC and 102% the Skyguards of TR. VS also pulls more AP Lightnings, more HEAT Lightnings but... less default Lightnings! The ARE spending their certs on Lightnings more often than the other factions.

    Third, different resource usage. The latest OOD data shows that Vanu pull default maxes at 95% the rate of TR, and 111% the rate of NC. VS uses their resources differently; and possible, more efficiently (they do win more alerts after all).

    Fourth: different class usage. Remember; 90% pop, but VS pulls 93% (vs NC) and 96% (vs TR) as many Heavy assaults. This shows as Heavies stick to their class, too, as there are 70% more Aurax LMGs as there are TR or NC. You don't pull vehicles as Heavy assault, and you also learn to deal with vehicles better as a HA as you continue playing it. These players will simply pull less vehicles to deal with vehicles.

    And who knows what other aspects there are. The nice thing is, we don't need to know exactly what is stopping VS from using the Magrider. We simply know that it's used less, and that is OK given that, when it is used, it is equal. And it is.
  15. FateJH

    What if we gave the Magrider Lockdown and the Prowler Magburner?
    • Up x 2
  16. boey

    Yeah, like you said "when it is used". The lesser usage time of the Magrider is no good thing for this game. This number should be quite equal to the other MBT's usage time.
  17. Nabutso

    OK. But increasing the stats isn't the right way to do it, because it is already equal (or better) statistically to the other MBTs.

    Besides, is it such a negative that the Magrider is used less? I mean, should we also be seeking to buff NC maxes or nerf TR maxes? Or, strangely, should we be seeking to buff TR Skyguards because VS pulls way more of them per pop?

    It is almost as if judging how good something is by how many people use it isn't very accurate; and that there are reasons outside of that piece of equipment itself, that makes it get pulled less. But, that ALSO doesn't mean that non-statistical 'buffs' are the way to go. Rather, it is a game-wide issue which needs to somehow be addressed. I don't know what the right solution would be - but anything that would increase the statistical effectiveness of the Magrider is clearly not the right choice.
  18. boey



    In this case it is quite negative that the Magrider is used less, because tanking is a very big part of this game.
    The Magrider as it is right now would need a complete overhaul. Skill ceiling must be addressed first and should be highest priority. I have no idea how, but that would be the only way.
  19. Nabutso

    How is it negative? This is one of the most significant differences between the factions, the MBT count. Yet, VS wins more alerts. Perhaps MBTs aren't a good use of resources and time?

    The skill ceiling, and floor, are both higher for the Magrider than the other tanks, as demonstrated earlier in the K/D and KPH numbers.
  20. boey


    In this case you've got to see the big picture. This is a combined arms game. It is advertised directly so. No matter the alert wins, usage time of infantry, vehicles and aircrafts across all factions should be quite equal. It's about game experience here.