"VS OP" Why?

It is not correct to pull statistics like "99% do not know how to use the Aphelion correctly" out of your rear end. Accordingly, we can discount these baseless accusations on your faction's side.

Also even if that were actually true, it is still completely representative of what the weapon currently is and achieves.

Also if 80% of the players don't know how to use the Saron, you are actually saying it's even more powerful than currently if used properly?

https://voidwell.com/ps2/oracle?sta...02899&startDate=2018-02-20&endDate=2019-02-19
https://voidwell.com/ps2/oracle?sta...02899&startDate=2018-07-14&endDate=2018-10-17
https://voidwell.com/ps2/oracle?sta...02899&startDate=2018-07-14&endDate=2018-10-17

It's not exactly a statement that says "oh noes the VS aren't OP because they don't know how to use it properly".

It also goes right against the age-old excuse of "oh no the VS are just more skilled than everyone else you see" that is used so often when it's proven that the VS score magically better at something even though the weapon is according to them worse than it's counterparts.


Also you are completely right: Easy to handle influences the statistics. If a common weapon for the VS is easier to handle and the general playerbase will have trouble using higher difficulty weapons, than easy to handle simply is superior. It might not be the best of the best in the hands of the absolute top players, but the point is that 95% of the players aren't the absolute top. That's one of my arguments and thanks for unwittingly backing that one up!

You are right that the Lancer isn't good anymore. However to say it's the worst while the Phoenix exists... The Phoenix can realistically only be used from inside a safe point such as a spawnbunker. You can't dodge, you can't get back into cover while the projectile is in flight, trying to exit the projectile in flight when you are attacked is a fools errant as by the time you've exited and know what's happening you are dead (assuming the player even knows that using "E" exits the Phoenix missile).

So shouldn't we buff both weapons?
The Lancer is difficult. You can't upgrade it easily without making it OP. Having a no-drop pin-point accurate projectile with consistent damage is incredibly dangerous and with small squads instantly becomes OP. This is what made both the old Lancer and Gatekeeper OP as all hell. Even with the 300m range restriction on the Lancer it would still be OP if we returned it's old damage and velocity profile.
Maybe the Lancer could be changed into some kind of DOT weapon? You aim the weapon, hold the trigger and a laser/high velocity plasmabeam comes out. The longer you train it on a target the higher the damage becomes. So momentarily missing the target means you have to rebuild the damage potential. Something like that might work as players can try to dodge the aim of the Lancer. It's not the best idea but the only one I can think off that doesn't require the Lancer to be more rocketlauncher than beam weapon.

The Phoenix needs to allow the player to move it's body while the missile is in flight so you can pop up, shoot and duck back into cover. Exiting the missile should also allow the missile to keep flying a straight line instead of dropping like a rock. The fact that you only reload after exiting the missile-cam already limits the DPS of this weapon much more than the Striker and Lancer, which is a good drawback for the hightened DPS ability. By rewarding players to exit the missile prematurely you increase their DPS, but also give their opponents a better chance of shooting or dodging the missile.

I guess this would be the argument about the Old Sauron cannon before it got nerfed to hell. Old Sauron was basically a single shot ray with an ineffectual splash radius. What made it so damn devastating was that it was pin-point accurate and had high damage with an absurd bullet velocity and no drop. But that also made it very hard to use against non-armor. It was the only gun on the magrider that felt like an actual tank gun, as it was incredibly effective at dealing with Armor. Dealing with ESFs, which were a one shot. And one shoted infantry on a direct hit, which was hard to do. Additionally at the time the Mag rider's main gun SUCKED. On top of being so low to the ground it was hard to aim above ****, it also didn't do anywhere near the same amount of damage as other tanks. It was also very floaty and slow forcing you to get closer. So you'd have to go full wolf pack with other Mags to kill something like a Vanguard. With the Sauron... what would happen is if the driver didn't have a gunner, he'd strafe the mag then quickly hop into the top gun, and shoot the opposing tank then hop back into driver seat.

They nerfed the **** out of it some years back. Made it a rapid fire cannon with a recoil so bad that it, and I am not joking about this, was able to shoot behind and even hurt it's self at max bloom. It got buffed so it's not so ****. But it's no where near the beast it used to be.

You didn't get the main about statistics.
So get your arguments to your "rear end" and add some of your baseless meaningless words there as you always do.
To get am I right or not - get 100 random passengers to your Aphellion Harasser and see how they will shoot. That is the answer.

More accurate.

Have you read my post? I'm not gonna disquss is VS OP or not. Read my post.

I didn't write this. I wrote few personal impressions about NC and VS stuff.


You have absolutely biased mind. Go and clear your head. You would do everything to nerf VS. If you could.

I'm not gonna disquss is VS OP or not. I have my own opinion and do not want to impose it on anyone

Game revolves 90% about combat inside buildings.
VS has Lasher which requires zero skill. Just look at a door and hold down LMB.
VS also has Betelgeuse, which never has to reload, never runs out of ammo, and if it's close to overheating, switching to secondary weapon enables the user to stay in combat while the primary weapon regenerates. The weapon reduces downtime to essentially zero, which matters a lot in a game with lots of players. The only downside is it has no attachments. Which doesn't matter because it's accurate enough without laser sight and in typical in-building engagement ranges the lack of a forward grip doesn't matter on a weapon with straight upward recoil and barely any shake.
In short: VS has the perfect weapon for low skilled and for high skilled players for 90% of the time.

Meanwhile TR and NC have "slightly different damage model" on some weapons.

If you want a better experience, fight in the shattered warpgate area. No buildings means no doors and no doors means no Lasher spam. Engagement ranges are a bit longer and fights can't be statpadded as good, which means barely anyone uses the Betelgeuse there.

Are you angry? Your sentences are degrading. You are so desperate to throw my own words back at me you insert them almost at random. Also what words are "baseless and meaningless"? Words like Unwittingly, accordingly and representative?

1: That is not an answer, that is forcing me to do your work for you and it's based on feeding your own confirmation bias.

2: It's a cheap dodge to say "I'm not here to discuss if they are OP or not but I'll then throw in some things that are heavily related to the VS being OP or not". Why should I be silent on good arguments against you just because you said you aren't there to discuss it? Especially when you basically do the exact opposite.

3: You may not have written it, but it's been a baseless argument since the game launched whenever people pointed out that the VS scored better at something. My point was that you are basically saying the VS are all bad players, which makes no difference whatsoever to the statistics that I bring up. If everyone is bad, those statistics are still representing exactly the status-quo. Oh sorry, "those statistics are still true and show us what is happening in the game". Are those words meaningfull to you?
Also as a side-note, you wrote a few personal impressions about TR and VS stuff. You talk about the Vulcan Harasser and how a mid-range Aphelion can destroy it, which was a TR vehicle last time I checked. You also point out a trade-off rather than some giant pillar of truth: Vulcans are easier to use and demolish an Aphelion Harasser up close, but the Aphelion has better ranged capabilities. Considering the accuracy and range of the Aphelion it's dumb that it's classified as the CQC weapon while the Saron is the CQC DPS dump weapon that has the option for long-range.

4: Talking about bias, I'm the one using statistics to prove my point. You randomly throw numbers that come from "I just drive around in a Harasser and judge my gunners". Guess where bias is the most likely to rear it's ugly head?

5: If you don't want to impose your opinion on anyone, why are you pointing out how you think the VS players are playing? Especially in a reply that is designed to debunk my words for why the VS is OP? Because that is your entire argument there: "VS isn't OP because it's players don't know how to use their weapons". You just don't mention the "VS isn't OP" part. Otherwise your entire response is just a random comment for no reason at all.

If there's one thing all VS players should be able to admit is that the heat mechanic on an already top tier weapon was a bad idea. No one is complaining about the carbine/AR and that's because its "farmability" with the heat mechanic is balanced out by having the 143/698 damage model.

I am really confused about the vehicle secondary discussion. Ignoring all the who said what, what's the short and concise point(s) you're trying to get across?

Lasher being OP is a legend. The very second you start to fire it, some big line of energy balls leads to you and suddenly makes you the target of choice everyone wants to kill ! And though it can kill some noob standing close to an opening, the damage is so low it won't prevent anyone from getting through it.

It's niche.

It only gets powerful that I've seen in 96+ fights where one side can spare several heavies (3+) to essentially be "offline" for killing, and only suppress one doorway. If they are firing constantly with resupply and 2 of them online at any given time, AND they know how to do it right (hit doorway, not fire through it) then it's very powerful.

That's it though.

Otherwise, It's DPS is so low someone can literally step into it's stream of fire and striple/quad dink the lasher player. Jackhammer is the best all around of the three. Chaingun maybe worst.

TL;DR: For those that dont care and just want the point, on average 76% of the Magriders in these stats are fully crewed while only 53% of both NC/TR MBTs are, my point is that its not weird for these Magriders to outperform the other MBTs since it seems almost every other enemy MBT they will fight are a solo driver = more kills before death for both Magrider primary and secondary weapons.

Also, since its a fairly large difference in % the Magrider might even be underperforming since the weapon stats dont really seem to reflect this big difference in crewed or not.

Those that want details, feel free to brave the long-post.

I looked at your statistics and im a little confused why you are using 2 year old statistics instead of something recent?
Anyway, not sure what you want to say with the stats either, that since VS have high numbers on the MBT secondaries that VS is OP?

Im going to pick a day and take some numbers here(VS/NC) so its easier to look at, August 1, because its nice in the middle and doesnt seem to have any big difference compared to other dates.

KPU
Saron 2,928
VS Halberd 4,228
Aphelion 2,158
Enforcer 2,963
NC Halberd 3,962
Mjolnir 2,092

Uniques
Saron 238
VS Halberd 224
Aphelion 53
Enforcer 173
NC Halberd 336
Mjolnir 56

Vehicle KPH
Saron 30,625
VS Halberd 34
Aphelion 5,125
Enforcer 26,917
NC Halberd 51,833
Mjolnir 5,667


I cant be arsed to compare all the weapons so im just adding all the VS/NC numbers per stat block.

KPU
VS: 9,314
NC: 9,017

Uniques
VS: 515
NC: 565

VKPH
VS: 69,75
NC: 84,417

So.. VS OP! yay? VS gets a few more kills per unique player and most of the NC VKPH comes from the Halberd which may or may not be what you mean makes VS OP since in general more VS use the faction weapons while NC relies on the Halberd.

But you are also bringing up the age old "VS more skilled lul" argument here which is imo a mistake since if there is anything it might actually be true for, its with MBT stats.

Same date, August 1st 2018.

Uniques(MBT Primary)
PC 253
FPC 348
VPC 74
Titan HEAT 420
Titan AP 485
Titan HESH 158

Smush them all togheter and we end up with 675 unique VS and 1063 unique NC MBT primaries. Would it surprise you that the KPU and VKPU quite heavily favors VS MBT Primaries as well because it shouldnt. Seems quite clearly that there are a lot more 'unique' Vanguards than Magriders driving around in total, most Magriders have 2nd gunners while a much larger part of the Vanguards dont have them, 1063 unique Vanguards primaries and only 565 unique NC secondaries with VS having 675 unique primaries and 515 unique secondaries.

It shouldnt be too crazy to think that if VS has 76% of their MBTs fully crewed compared to NC with 53% of theirs, that perhaps just maybe, the VS MBTs will live a bit longer on average? Get a few more kills? Especially when TR are not much better with their 1209 primaries and only 649 secondaries(uniques), they also have only 53% of their MBTs fully crewed giving VS Magriders an advantage no matter where they go, its much more likely that a crewed Magrider will bump into a solo Vanguard/Prowler than any other way around.

I should be fairly safe to say that yep, these Magriders are on average just 'better' than the NC/TR MBTs and its perfectly normal that they outperform the other MBTs. I would even argue that with such a large difference in crewed/not crewed that the Magrider in general is underperforming and should be buffed based on these stats.

Also shows nicely how gimped Magriders are without their secondaries, most VS wont even bother pulling one if they dont have a gunner while NC/TR are happy to drive one solo... also another point for why the Magrider is probably underperforming as a MBT since the Magriders have by far the fewest unique drivers and still maintains such a high % of people in their secondaries, a lot of them are likely not random matchups but people that play with each other, otherwise the % of crewed MBTs should be similar to what the NC/TR have.

The point Botji, is why.

The VS Magriders are outnumbered. The VS do not have a significant higher gunner usage on any other platform than the Magrider. And despite that the Magriders score better overall?

What reason do the VS have to get more gunners only in the Magrider? Its not a higher teamwork, if that were the case they would have more gunners in other vehicles as well. They dont, so it has to do with the Magrider itself and not the players. In other words: the Magrider has some advantage that attracts more gunners and makes it more powerful.

The VS are also outnumbered. There are more 2/2 Vanguards than there are 2/2 Magriders. Every other 1/2 Vanguard they meet they will be supported by a 2/2 Vanguard, and most fights arent 1v1's anyway. So every "bonus" kill they get for engaging a 1/2 Vanguard is negated (besides that there are enough 2/2 Vanguards to simply back up every single 1/2 Vanguard when going up against the VS).

Then there is this: Vanguard Halberds.
Every Vanguard with a Halberd has to be a 2/2 Vanguard and is supposed to live up to a Magrider right? Yet it doesnt. You attribute this to the Magrider killing more 1/2 but that doesnt make sense with the fact that Magriders are outnumbered.

Occams razor:
Do the VS pull skill out of thin air whenever they touch a Magrider but not with other vehicles?
Do the VS simply have a superior Magrider?

Which one is it do you think?

Another thing: grouping of vehicles.
The basic tactic in this game is to pop up behind cover, fire and return behind cover when you get too much damaged. Vanguards, Prowlers and Lightnings are much more limited in how they can enter/exit this cover, limiting how many can use the same cover at a time and fire at the enemy.
Magriders on the other hand can get 3+ Magriders using the same cover with less risk of blocking each other and from farther distances from said cover. This makes it easier for Magriders to point more guns in the same direction for no extra effort compared to the other tanks.

Magriders also have a unique synergy with Lightnings. Magriders and Lightnings will rarely block each other and the Lightning takes up different positions than the strafing Magrider. This makes it easier to work together without any extra coordination.


All in all the Magrider's design is simply superior, and that is why it scores better. Which is one reason the VS is OP.

Solutions would be to add advantages on the Vanguard and Prowler as well to equalize it. Rather than the done-to-death "nerf it to hell" strategy.

Indeed. The point is, the vehicle doesn not even have to be stronger per se - even though I would argue it has the most useful unique abilities, but that is beside the point - it is sufficient if the vehicle feels better and is more fun to gun for. This perceived higher level of enjoyment leads to more gunners, which makes the vehicle stronger.
So it isn't even neccessary to BUFF the other tanks very much in my opinion, it would be enough to give them some fun and useful mechanics to toy around with, some that are engaging and not situational.

Yes, "strong" does not have to be a straight damage and armor increase. It can be speed, better turning, strafing etc as well.

That the VS score better thanks to their equipment is clear. We should be focussing on adding those inherent advantages to tanks. We can still do something with reverse speed, the engine power when ramming or pushing, give projectiles special features like piercing enemies or low guidance, re-allocation of armor values. You could also look into adding secondary and tertiary abilities that the driver and/or gunner can use. The original concept art for the Prowler focused on stealth and ECM, so you could give one tank more detection abilities while another focusses on staying hidden or creating false signatures. You can also give each tank access to a movement ability (shift), a deploy ability (B), a defensive ability (space), an attack ability (F) and an alternative fire mode (X). Some of these could simultaneously be controlled by the gunner. This makes tanks feel more like the swiss armyknives and means they dont need to completely dominate infantry to make players feel powerful in a tank.

Yeah yeah, another whiniest post from Demigan ^)
You should add "highly likely" to your sentence "That the VS score better thanks to their equipment is clear."

The Maggie pilots suffered in tank battles for many years. Now the tanks are equal in their capabilities, and these pilots benefit more.
Oh I also should add highly likely....

Yes complaining about someone else is definitely not whiny.

I have yet to see evidence that the Magrider was underperforming before. In fact when I first presented the data proving the Magrider not to underperform people were still proclaiming it was performing the worst. This argument doesnt make sense however, since the VS do not score better on average with other vehicles like Sunderers. Where did that higher skill on the Magrider go the moment they touched something else?

Since you dont use data aside from biased "I guess its 90% of the players just trust me on this" and your preferred method of "discussion" is trying to ridicule anyone who disagrees with you its safe to say you cannot be trusted and at best we should count your opinion and nothing else.

Okay, just throwing out this: Rocket Boosters for Vanguards.
What they do is simple: they lift you off the ground a little bit to limit physics problems (otherwise this whole thing would be an utter trap), and launch you forward (undirected, it is automaticaly forward and you CAN NOT STOP, range let's say 50-70 m) while projecting a shield forward that increases the collision damage you deal during the charge. Essentially it makes the vehicle a powered ram. Would that be useful? Sometimes, mostly to finish off close opponents instead of reloading or for a bit of a speed increase . But it would be fun to use if you are going down. It is the ultimate "good day to die" red button. I'd sacrifice the Vanguard shield any day for this, it just sounds way more fun. To give it a bit of a downside, I'd say lock the main weapon from shooting and reloading (if you use the ability while reloading, it cancels the progress and you have to start over afterwards).
It fits the idea that NC has thrown together what they can get with little regard for safety. It is also amusing to use, can be avoided by the opponent (although it may not be exactly easy to do so), comes with downsides as well, and if you use it correctly it can be a powerful tool.

For Prowlers I have the Engineer slot.
Third slot for Engineer only, provides the advantages of a maxed out Auto Repair as long as someone is in there. Allows a bit more self-reliant play, goes well with the decent mobility. The Engineer also gets a little interface to reroute power, so he can change priorities (in percentage) between engines, main gun, turret and the ability to be repaired (both by self-repair and external engineers). Default would be 25% each, maximum for a system should be 50%. Say, you REALLY want to kill something, you can get both guns to 50% (would increase the reload speed and the damage by 25% each - a performance increase of 50%), but this comes with a total speed of 0 and no repairs. Makes you a very powerful sitting duck. If you need to run, you can boost turret and speed, but main gun is disabled and you can not repair. If you are out of combat, you can boost repair to receive a bonus on repairs received to get back into shape faster. To avoid this being very much too strong in the hands of capable users, setting power above 40% for a given system should cause system overload, which means for every system on overdrive they'd start suffering 50 damage per second after a free period of 15 sec. Once rebalanced, no system can be overcharged again for 30 seconds.

Now, either of them, or even both, may be completely out of line, or not agree with the ideas of anyone else at all. But the point is: there are ideas. There is stuff that can be done to make vehicles more unique and give them a bit more flavour.

Okay, wanted to edit some, but it was too late, so here goes.

Magriders deal 200 damage per sec to anything below them. This does 2 things: Lightnings will think twice before sneaking below, as they need to be able to afford the price. It also helps with AV mines not detonating, and it prevents people from placing them right underneath (they'll have to place them enxt to the tank as with any other vehicle).

Vanguard ram charge should also real 1k damage to the vehicle AFTER the charge is completed if there is no collision damage happening. This means it is still a desperate card to play in a fight to help you survive, but limits its use as a "magbooster clone" during travel time.
And since the Vanguard would still be without a passive then, let's give it the blasted Numbnutz as passive and decrease the reacharge so it is actually useful. Ironically this would fit the guerilla-style fluff, but not really the actual crunch of this tank. Still, it's easier to work with what's already there.

I feel I already answered the why question:

"Also shows nicely how gimped Magriders are without their secondaries, most VS wont even bother pulling one if they dont have a gunner while NC/TR are happy to drive one solo..."

But I will expand on it since I forget not everyone knows the joys of driving the Magrider... VS get more gunners because most of them know better than to go without one, I dont say that like "TR/NC are stupid!"

A gunner is much more than extra damage for a Magrider, its a question of awareness and in a Magrider you need aprox ALL of the awareness that you can get since you are basically dead if either a Prowler or Vanguard or even a Lightning gets up close and you dont already know about it as well as have a plan of how you will move, either of those driving up behind you almost a guaranteed free trip to a spawnroom because again, no turret. Being hit from behind is bad enough for any tank but not being able to use your main gun while they get 1-2 free hits in is terrible.

Not having a turret as the driver is the most overlooked drawback the Magrider has. All other tanks can quickly do a 360 scan around them, dont even have to wait for the turret to turn around since the 3rd person view turns faster but the Magrider cant do that, 3rd person view gives a wider view forward but you are still blind to everything behind you and its the gunners job to keep watch because spinning around 360 in a tank even if its a Magrider is not a great idea.

Also a big reason for why I dont really like the Magrider, if you get random gunners you dont just need them to hit a few shots on enemies you are shooting but you have to rely on their skill/experience to also keep you aware of enemies around you and we all know how reliable random people on the internet are, throw in that the Magrider is more a oversized Harasser in that it wants to get the flanks instead of head on fights, the gunner is a hugely important part of your tank in that they need to be fairly experienced to know when to not give away your location instead of just shooting everything they see as well as the whole "Be your eyes".

These combined makes my personal theory that Magriders have a much higher % of premade driver/gunner teams than any other MBT more likely and while circumstantial the stats would support that as well as my own personal experience of there being a overwhelmingly high chance you get thrown out of a Magrider with a voice command "Sorry!" if you get in to gun for them(if its not already squad locked), unless you see them already driving around in the fields, those are usually open.


As for Magriders being outnumbered, stats might suggest that but it could also easily be that the MBTs that are solo swap between weapons much more than a 2/2 tank does. If you spawn a solo Vanguard or Prowler you might be more likely to swap to HEAT or HESH when you know the 'next' base will be a good farm while 2/2 MBTs usually dont stick around just shelling a base or perhaps VS is more likely to use C4 fairies to get rid of tanks near bases, thats one advantage the Magrider does have over the others, it usually moves around a lot so my guess is compared to other MBTs they would die less often to C4.

Finally, VS does have a advantage on average BR for both MBT primary and secondary weapons so "more skilled lul" could actually still be a thing when talking MBTs but yeah, my personal theory is just that Magriders being so dependant on their gunners being good and preferably communicating with the driver, there is a higer % of premade driver/gunner teams than the other tanks that in general are 'ok' driving around solo.

Adding to that, the Magrider's primary since beta and years and years onwards were objectively s*** compared to the primary of TR/NC which started the whole thing. Every VS player knew that if you pull a Maggie, you better have a gunner (preferably someone you know), and those who didn't were the same VS players who called the Magrider underpowered on the forums.

We usually ended up doing a tag team between driver and gunner (or simply pulling a Maggie for a more dedicated driver) to conserve resources. Resources back then were divided in three parts (air vehicles, ground vehicles, and infantry resources) and as such it was more important to spend them wisely.

For context, I've been around since beta.

And you probably won't since I doubt there are any data from back then. It was, however, common knowledge that the Maggie's primary was crap compared to the other's with the WORST dps + a lot of projectile drop + the worst velocity. Similarly, it was also widely known the secondary was where its at.

It shouldn't then be much of a leap to realise why VS started out using their MBT with 2/2 players at a higher rate than NC/TR. The behaviour was literally tied to the design of the vehicle. Much like how the NC were able to figure out that their MAX were better a closer ranges than the other factions and used in a manner which suited its design rather than trying to snipe with it.

Even so, I still think vehicles overall should be looked at and given the same faction specific abilities and options as infantry. The customisation feels too flat and lack depth to create an interesting meta IMO. Improving how it feels to drive should also be a priority. In this regard, the Maggie has a lot personality but the other two MBTs are functional but lacks that certain something.