What they don't tell you about the Magrider (history of tanks pre Planetside)

Discussion in 'PlanetSide 2 Gameplay Discussion' started by ohknoh, Apr 8, 2023.

  1. ohknoh

    A little bit of Pre- Planet Side history on the magrider, and other tanks.

    The Magrider, lightning and vanguard first appeared in a game called Tanarus. The game pit 4 teams (Red, Blue, Green and Gray) of 5 tanks against one another for control of various large arenas. As a kid in 97-98, I played this game quite a lot. I remember wondering how cool it would be if there were infantry as well as just tanks.

    There were 5 tanks. Each tank had open bays that could be filled with equipment and weaponry. Most tanks also had a built-in piece of equipment, to make them even more unique. In order from lightest to heaviest you had:

    The Chameleon-
    low turret traverse, cloaking tank, that could not activate shields while invisible. Certain builds allowed it to quickly take out damaged tanks from behind. High risk, high reward.

    Lightning-
    Full 360d turret traverse, fast highly mobile medium tank. Built in missile launcher. It could literally run circles around the other tanks but could not stand up to the heavies one on one.

    Magrider-
    No turret traverse, hovering medium tank, with unique movement mechanics, the ability to hover up small ledges, and a built-in phase-multiplier, which increases laser damage. Could not stand up to the heavier tanks one on one.

    Vanguard- State of the art heavy tank. It performed exactly as you would expect a MBT to perform and had the equipment space to customize for nearly any situation. Most well-rounded tank, and the go to when attempting to make any serious plays for map control.

    Devastator-
    Low turret traverse, super heavy tank. Highest armor in the game, and also had built in nano repair and a built in cannon, allowing it to make use of heat or frag shells. Could be outfitted to be a very difficult to kill flag runner. Was typically bad in one-on-one fights verses vanguards but could usually slug through everything else in a pinch.

    How this all worked out will be below.
  2. ohknoh

    Game play wise, all teams tried to control as much territory as possible, and eventually destroy an opponents base if I remember right.

    All tanks ran off of battery power. All energy based systems used battery power to charge. Battery power was generated by control points that you controlled. Control points generated positive battery power for the team controlling them, and negative power for any enemies who came within 10-20 yards. The drain increased the closer you got.

    Weapons:
    Lasers: three types. could have their damage increased by a piece of equipment called a phase multiplier. This was mandatory for anyone using lasers.

    1x- fires a single laser, high rate of fire, high range, low damage. 1 slot.
    2x- fires 2 lasers, medium rate of fire, medium range, medium damage. 2 slots i think.
    4x- the quad laser, fires 4 lasers, low rate of fire, low range, high damage. 3 slots i think.

    Missiles- (required a 2 shot launcher. each missile takes one equipment slot)
    Phenix- unguided high damage, long range.
    Guided- guided, slightly lower damage than the phenix, long range.
    Force- unguided, no damage, but would knock back any target that was hit. Could be incredibly effective if you were able to hit from a low angle on a tank that was above you. There was a game mode called Force wars, where everyone had a lightning, and two force missiles, and you tried to launch each other. Very high learning curve, very brutal.

    Cannons- i can't remember how many slots the cannons took, but it was a lot. And you had limited ammo, that took up space. They could deal AOE, and also caused knockback, which made them dangerous if you were on a ledge.

    Lancer- High damage weapon, that fired a single powerful bolt/beam of energy. it could completely blow through the highest level of shields, but it had a very long recharge, and took up 2 slots.

    Mines- you know how these work

    Equipment-

    Shields- Provided shields for your tank. Mandatory if you wanted to survive. Shields used battery power to recharge and maintain.
    Shield booster- doubled the strength of shielding. Mandatory if you were using shields.

    Stealth- prevented you from being actively targeted, and from showing up on the mini map.

    Capture devices- used to capture control points. You had to deploy them, and then defend them while they captured.

    Extra battery- allowed you to carry more battery, mandatory if you wanted to extend your reach beyond your control points.


    I can't remember all of the details, so this is a limited list.
  3. ohknoh

    The point of this, is that combat generally happened in three different varieties.

    1- Long range combat, with both teams standing off near their control points and shooting at targets of opportunity.
    2- Lone hunting, where small groups would troll the maps attempting to huntdown enemies.
    3. Control pushes, which typically required CQC.

    Typically combat was a mashup of these three aspects, and was fluid.

    The key take away was that for any serious play, you picked the vanguard. For hunting and flanking, you could play as the lightning or cham, but you were much better off if you managed to flank with a vanguard. The Cham was best at disrupting enemy lines, forcing them to load out for cham-hunting, which COULD reduce their frontline strength and allow your team a break through.

    The magrider was a meme tank. It COULD be used to get to useless areas on the map. If your tank started getting shot by a 1x laser from behind you at render range, you knew it was a magrider. Pull a lightning, load a phenix missile, and send it flying across the map. Or just ignore it, since the 1x laser really couldn't keep up with full battery shield recharge. it was hilarious.

    A few players made the mag work, but only for a very limited time. Once you realized their weakness, you simply wrapped behind them and watched them explode.

    The magrider could not turn fast enough to keep people from getting behind it. It's hover height made it an incredibly easy target for force missiles. It was a little bit bigger than the Lightning, smaller than the vanguard, but still an easy target. Its armor was even across the fronts and sides if I remember right, but that didn't help it much. I can remember seeing them 2 or maybe 3 times. I tried them myself, hoping it would be something that other tankers just weren't good at, with a high skill ceiling that could exploit some sort of advantage. I was of course wrong.
  4. Demigan

    Since you’ve been pro-VS before I assume that you are advocating that the Magrider is bad?

    Are you literally saying “the Magrider in this other game was bad so its bad in this one” despite the weapons, damage and abilities being different? I mean you literally say its easy to get behind the Magrider in that game and kill it because it turns so slow while in PS2 the Magrider is the fastest turning vehicle in an arena with plenty of useful space rather than useless space in the game you mention.

    Regardless of your intentions, this history lesson is meaningless for PS2 balance.
  5. ohknoh


    And I suppose you're here to try and say that the Magrider is totally fine.

    The magrider was never designed to be a frontline MBT. It was a harrasser. Beafing it up to MBT status doesn't help, and in fact it's even worse in this game, as the magrider in tanarus had equal armor on its front and sides. This made up for its inability to control which side it presented to the enemy.

    I'm not sure what you mean by saying the weapons and damage abilities are different. The tanks had access to the same weapons in Tanarus, in PS2 they have access to weapons that are similar. The added gunner is a difference..but all MBTs have this, so it's not just some advantage that the Mag now has. I notice you do this a lot, you treat everything that the Mag can do as though it is the only tank that can do it.

    In tanarus, you could even equip tanks with a booster, to increase its forward speed for several seconds. It took up equipment space, and really wasn't useful for doing anything other than jumping, if i remember correctly.

    Your claim that the magrider is the fastest turning tank is laughable as well. Getting behind someone doesn't involve both tanks rotating on their central access...it's a hook or J pattern. The magrider cannot turn fast enough to avoid this, although mag burning can get you out of this pinch.

    The common tactic of all other MBTs and lightnings is to try and get under/ behind the Mag... there's a reason for this.

    The mag's turning speed is inferior to all other tank's turret speed.

    The Magrider is a great vehicle, but it's a bad tank.

    Like all things in this game, the Mag has its uses. Being a powerful MBT is simply not one of them.

    Feel free to spout your conjecture now.
  6. Demigan

    This is such a nonsensical argument.

    When you need to control the side your front armor is facing, you are being flanked. This is what we call a “bad place to be” and in most cases you should try to disengage or you’ll likely die. In normal combat where you aren’t flanked the Magrider has it the best: it will always face its target with the front armor, which the other two often wont out of necessity.
    Who can disengage the easiest? The Magrider ofcourse. It can strafe into cover easily. Most cover requires the NC/TR MBT to show their side armor to get into it, not to mention their longer hitbox. So thats two advantages already in one: front armor showing and easier to get into cover.
    But what if you need to turn and run? The Magrider has to show its rear armor! Well so would the TR/NC, but their turn and run is so slow its almost guaranteed suicide while a Magrider at least has a chance to escape that way because it turns so damn quickly and can accelerate so fast with its afterburner. So that is 3 advantages to the Magrider when your front armor facing is important.

    Also lets get back to that normal attack. The TR/NC need to constantly be aware where the nearest cover is and where their chassis is pointing relative to their turret and said cover. This often means people will use their side armor out of necessity as turning to get into cover takes too long compared to already being ready to move back into it. Additionally the turret on both Prowler and Vanguard are more to the back of the vehicle so its easier to hit them before they are able to fire back when rounding cover. The Magrider can round the cover with their thin front armor showing, the first thing people can fire at is the side skirt that is less than 1/3rd the hitbox size of the center of the Magrider so not a big target at all and the Magrider has a lot more freedom when and where it enters or exits cover.

    So no the Magrider isn’t weak when it comes to facing opponents, its in fact the strongest of all MBT’s.

    And yes it’s an MBT. Look up what it means to be an MBT and you’ll notice that its more MBT than the Vanguard (the Vanguard is a heavy tank concept which we don’t use any more in RL for a reason, tanking hits is less favorable than avoiding it).

    I don’t even know how you can claim that the Mag turning the fastest is useless. Unless your opponent is pretty much against your rear before you notice them you can always turn faster than they can follow your rear. And again because the Magrider has a better mobility it has a better chance to actually ambush its opponents.

    The Magrider is a great vehicle like you say and thus not bad and doesn’t need changing. And its also a great tank because it does everything you want a tank to do: face enemies with the strongest armor, deal enough damage to be lethal (oh yes it does), avoid damage where it can through maneuverability, have the mobility to attack over tough terrain. It fits the MBT purpose almost to a T. Again just look up what an MBT is supposed to be on the modern battlefield rather than go off on what you think its supposed to be before answering.
    • Up x 1
  7. ohknoh

    More conjecture, just as expected.


    Let's get some values straight before we go forward. All of this comes from VR.

    Magrider is as Wide from the front as the Prowler is long.
    Magrider is wider than the prowler.
    Magrider is longer than the prowler.

    Magrider is 75% as wide as the Vanguard is long.
    Magrider is slightly shorter in length to the Vanguard.
    Magrider is wider than the Vanguard.

    Comparing Vehicle performance.

    The turning rate is equal for all MBTs with Rival Chassis, at roughly 5.3 seconds to complete a 360 degree turn.
    The turning rate is 5.3 for the Mag for racer chassis, and 6.1 roughly for the Van and Prowler.

    Tested in VR by facing the spawn pad, aligning the hood ornament with the arrows in the center, and spinning counter clockwise. Timer starts as soon as spinning starts, and is called when the ornament passes the arrows in the center.

    Rival:
    Magrider : 58 KPH forward, 42 kph backwards, 26 KPH strafe.
    Prowler : 65 kph forward, 35KPH backwards.
    Vanguard: 61 kph forward, 31 kph backwards,


    Again, the concept of armor facing seems to fly straight over your head. Being flanked doesn't necessitate a retreat. If a flash, light assault, engineer, heavy assault, esf, harrasser or even a random infantry is on your flank, the Mag must turn to face it. Every other tank need only point its turret towards the enemy. No matter how you try to spin this, it is a weakness.

    -1 for your "Mag is the best MBT" score.

    The Mag's strafing speed is slower than the reverse speed of every other tank. Most tankers will edge out of cover at an angle, where they can quickly reverse, and expose only as much as necessary. All tanks tend to expose roughly 75% of their tank when moving in and out of cover. The Mag's large profile means that they too are exposed. And as I stated, the Mag is as wide as the Prowler is long. I don't expect you to understand this concept, but it is the truth. The Magrider is the largest tank.

    -2 for your "Mag is the best MBT" score.

    The Magrider with rival chassis has the same turning speed as the Van and Prowler. Racer seems to slow the Van and prowler by a half second. Turning and running is always potential suicide.... which means simply trying to engage an enemy who's behind you is also suicide for the Mag. You always help to prove me right.

    The Mag-burner can certainly get the Mag out of trouble, once the mag has turned. However, since it is the slowest tank, if the enemy has the chance to run it down, then they will certainly be able to.

    -3

    This.... is just a ridiculous amount of conjecture. I'll try to untangle what you mean before debunking it.

    A: TR and NC must constantly be aware of the nearest cover.
    ~ All tanks must be aware of the nearest cover. The other tanks have the option of turning their turret to survey their surroundings. The magrider must swing its entire tank around in order to gain additional situational awareness.

    B: TR and NC must worry about which direction their chassis is pointing.
    ~ Yes, the magrider's ability to move in any direction means that its facing has no bearing on which direction it can go, although speed is impacted.

    C: TR and NC have turrets that are far back, making them easier to target when moving in and out of cover.
    ~ The TR and NC use their forward and reverse speeds when peeking from cover. The Mag typically uses its strafing speed, which is less than half the speed of TR and NC. It is the slowest tank for peeking.

    D: Magrider's front armor is thinner than other tanks.
    ~ Although the Mag's armor is tapered, its frontal cross section is larger than the prowler's from any direction, and very similar in size to the Vanguard. Additionally, the magrider sits higher than any other tank, exposing even more of it.

    -4

    Wrong. The Mag is the slowest, largest, and weakest in terms of damage. Its mobility does not trump the sheer fire power of the Prowler, nor does it trump the survivability of the Vanguard. All MBTs face the primary threat with frontal armor, but only the Mag is asked to turn its entire chassis to engage other threats.

    These tanks are from a fantastical future, in which energy shields and magnetic hovering have been integrated into the military. Each tank represents one aspect of what our current day MBTs attempt to achieve. Fire power, durability and mobility. The Magrider is no better a representative of this than any other. Although, the Vanguard IS the closest to modern tanks, especially with racer chassis. You're reallllly reaching.

    Again, the mag's superior turning is untrue for the rival chassis, and roughly 0.5 seconds faster for the racer. Watch videos or play the Mag yourself. All enemies will attempt to rush you in CQC. The magrider's most effective defense against this is to magburn+ spin around. Typically, this will place you behind the Tank that rushes you, as they are turning. Typically, you will be able to fire at their side armor. The prowler is the best ambusher, as it is not only the fastest tank, it also has the highest damage. Meaning it can strike fast and destroy a target in less than 5 seconds.

    The Mag is a great vehicle. It is not a good MBT. It cannot out damage a Van or Prowler, it is slower than both, and it is the largest of the 3.

    The mag's design carries a hefty number of issues that prevent it from being a good MBT. Add to this the dev's reticence in giving it enough damage output to seriously threaten other MBTs, and you have a tank who's only real option when engaged by another MBT is to retreat.

    The Mag's uniqueness can often times lead people to assume that it is OP, which results in nerfs. However, just like the magrider from tanarus, once you understand the Mag's weaknesses, its mystical nature ceases to exist, and it becomes an easy target.
  8. RRRIV

    I almost feel bad for demi for trying to respond to another delusional VS main, but some people need to learn the facts. I will add something though. ohknoh seems to forget damage amp from side and back shots. Mag can keep the front (0% damage increase) facing engaging Armored vehicles far more easily than other tanks who often find themselves getting hit on the side (15% damage increase) and soon, the rear (50% damage increase). You should take that into consideration.

    Also, something I will personally point out, the whole "go under the magrider" thing is BS. The only tank that can do that is a lighting and the many times I have tried that, yea I get 1 extra shot in, but then the mag has spun around OFF my lighting and are then hitting the side (or rear if they have decent game sense) for a still easy kill. The only tank that you can go under and win is the chimera.


    Another thing, mobility = survivability. That's why infils are so good. its better to not get hit in the first place than to have the health/defense to take that hit. Dark Elden Borne taught me that.
  9. ohknoh

    It's actually somewhat heartening to see that someone who supports Demigan is just as ignorant as he is.

    I don't mind reiterating my point. All tanks can keep their frontal armor pointing towards the armor that they are engaging. The system draws a line between your tank, and the side of the tank that's facing you, so even if you're at a slight angle, and your opponent is shooting at the exposed side, I believe the game still counts it as frontal armor.

    The Mag is the only tank that is required to turn the entire tank in order to engage something off target. Be it a C4 fairy, flash, or harasser. If the Mag wants to quickly counter any of them, the Mag has to turn to face it, presenting its rear to the engaged armor.

    Weighing this against your claim that the Mag has an easier time facing its main target, the lack of a turret is still a tremendous liability, and, like I stated, was the Mag's main weakness in tanarus.

    Your argument strategy is just like Demigan's, you declare something is BS, then go on to explain why it isn't BS, even going as far to say you get 1 extra shot. That one shot is everything. If you're rushing the Mag and getting one extra shot at its rear/ bottom armor and still losing...that's on you. Some (most) people who know the strategy succeed, unless as I said, the Mag burns off to create distance/throw off their aim, and turns to face them again.

    All tanks can drive under the Mag. I'm not sure why you think otherwise.

    This really is the cherry on top of your silly post. Mobility= survivability. HP= survivability. High DPS= survivability. Most of all Speed= survivability.

    It's hilarious that you would mention infiltrators as though they have better mobility than any other class. Their survival comes from their ability to turn invisible.

    The proper class to mention in regard to mobility is the Light Assault. Who are super effective at evading enemies due to their mobility and are great at dropping in to get quick kills. What makes them effective is their mobility combined with their high alpha from shotguns or smgs, as they can close the distance to the optimal range effectively.

    When it comes to vehicles, SPEED is the trait that you're looking for. If you're having trouble hitting the magrider that's slowly strafing left and right at 21 kph, that's on you..(again).
  10. karlooo

    What I dislike about the Magrider from my point of view (TR) is its design. It is designed as a heavy tank and the main gun is at the bottom of the tank, which causes confusion because on uneven terrain you expect the tank to show its entire hull to shoot at you but it actually displays 1/3 and then shoots through the ground, that is silly.

    About the heavy tank design, I also have in mind its top heavy duty guns, which enable it to be used as a heavy tank. In general I hate the top guns on every MBT, I find it ultra dumb to have the ability to equip essentially a 2nd weapon equivalent to the main armament of the tank, like the Halberd.... Basically if your tank doesn't have 2 guns you lost against this tank no matter what, stupid design which applies to all tanks here.

    This is just a simple opinion because I don't play VS and cannot suggest what the tank's purpose should be.

    And I dislike it how VS has equivalent military production to TR, but it's not necessarily their fault, but more so the fault of the TR armed forces, their compositions and weapons arsenal in game, it is not displayed correctly. VS uses a new type of technology based on alien relics and I guess by reverse engineering they created new sophisticated engines and new types of weapons, which allowed them to surprise TR in combat, on the battlefield and break away from the republic. This is what should be highlighted, how did they accomplish that. In general I hate it how they print it out their unique assets, just like TR would at the same rate when TR is known for being conventional, using standard ways of engineering, creating reliable, mass producible objects. Simply said. There is so much to this and I think I will make a new topic with many ideas and conversations but primarily on how to improve the traits of TR, that does not revolve around adding more barrels lol. I don't understand what the hell the devs have with adding more barrels to weapons, like what does that have to do with TR? lol (the title of the post with have something to do with revenue if I create it)

    What I don't like about the devs and also some people here, is that they seem to treat treat these assets as numbers. Like look at the stats, compare it to this mbt and so on, but they never add into account the purpose of the asset, how it correlates with the factions armed forces and strategies, whether it fits. What is it supposed to do, for example I mentioned above: How did the VS exactly combat TR on the battlefield, what countered the TR's tactics? (Multiple barrels on guns to shoot more is not a fricking tactic and is not conventional, this idea holds 0 correlation with TR background, why are the devs obsessed with this)
    To me it feels as if the devs treat the assets such as a tanks, as infantry in some way, you are using nanites to upgrade your infantry to have wheels and bulletproof armor lol, and therefore you have these assets enclosed from the objective and part of their own minigame. And that's how the game then looks, infantry doesn't have proper weaponry to combat tanks, they are part of their own minigame, you have tanks with 4 guns and so on, an absolute illogical mess because of how they are treated.
  11. ohknoh



    I think I understand the gist of what you're saying. More or less, Empire fantasy should take the front seat compared to pure game mechanics. I agree 100% with this in theory, and I believe it's attainable in practice, and would actually lead to a more interesting game. But it would be far more difficult to balance ( not impossible, just more difficult.)

    The game does boast some asymmetrical combat, but on a smaller scale, like the lasher vs the jackhammer and Mini chaingun.

    The ultimate problem is that players will optimize the fun out of every game if given the time. Meaning, if there's something that grants a slight advantage, players will find it, and abuse the crap out of it.
  12. karlooo


    Yeah near impossible to balance with these like accurate calculations that we have now but if weapons just dealt damage then there wouldn't be much to calculate and easier to balance. Only thing that'd need to be looked into is the design of the weapon. What would counteract the high DPS would be inaccuracy, where in some cases you'd need to single shot to reliably hit a target.
    Like the old school game counter strike source, Is my idea here but this is just off the top of my head. It would change the entire game and entire new map designs would need to be created, and it needs to be well thought out.
    Aiming would still be needed for many weapons like the rocket launchers, so for this hip fire idea to make sense, what can be done is to make it look like the HUD is built into the soldiers visors, that show them where their gun is aiming without actually having to use iron sights. Everything'd need to be redesigned.

    So, if weapons just dealt real damage then there wouldn't be much to balance here and instead more focus can be on the roles the designs and so on, rather than precise numbers, is my idea here.

    This is just for infantry, tanks and other machines, whole another story. It is possible, I have a general idea, but for sure it would be hard. Basically creating a whole new game but I doubt that will happen because the game has bot accounts and was designed for them.
  13. Demigan

    Thanks for warning us that you’ll use conjecture.

    Your post includes rather specific data that can only be gotten through in-game tests. But since you’ve already proven unwilling to do that, ignored the opportunity to test the much easier Prowler and Parahelion firing rate tests weren’t done simultaneously and you already proclaimed some dead wrong things as “facts” like the Prowler fire rate. So no I’m not going to believe that.

    Your arguments are also conveniently ignoring a lot of stuff, like how the Magrider’s actual frontal hitbox is a lot smaller since its not a box. It migh be as wide as other tanks, but much of that width is very thin and not a good target at all. If you can claim the width as a downside of the Magrider then TR and NC can claim the turret as a downside (and it actually adds more total hitbox too).

    This is a core with your arguments. They miss important caveats and details while others are downright wrong. This selective bias is a standard for the VS inferiority+superiority complex of course.
  14. ohknoh

    It really doesn't matter if you ignore it or not. Facts are facts. Regarding the perihelion, my focus of that thread is the punishing mechanics that have only been exacerbated by the nerf to the hold time on the weapon. Leave it in its thread.

    The Magrider is certainly rounded, but you are heavily exaggerating the tapering of its hull. The width of the Magrider and the Vanguard are almost the same. The thickness of the Mag and Van are almost the same for the part of the mag that's equal in width to the Van. The only section that's thinner, is the part that extends past the Van's width.


    [IMG] This is the only picture that I could find of the tanks together.

    The thicknesses of all tanks are comparable; however, the Prowler is the smallest, and has the smallest turret. I think volumetrically the tanks were meant to have the same overall volume, with different hit boxes.


    All of the caveats and details that you mention seem to come from your imagination. In testing, they are incorrect, as I've shown with the turning speeds of the MBT. You've created an exaggerated model of the Mag in your mind, without ever really verifying. In searching for some posts, I saw dozens of them with you in it doing the exact same thing you've tried to do here. That being: derail the point of the topic with a bunch of misconceptions.
  15. Demigan

    Yeah, facts are facts. Fact is that you have already made a dozen false claims and presented them as facts, like the fire rate of the Prowler or you utter lack of understanding action, reaction and reflex, still waiting on that site you supposedly used btw. Which is another thing, you don’t prove anything.

    Also the Parahelion isn’t some mightily complex weapon. Its literally “hold button to charge. Charging means less DPS so only use it in anticipation of an enemy to instantly fire a lot of damage. You can’t hold it indefinitely to prevent permanent high first strike capabilities so time it”. Its not rocketscience and it actually has something to exploit. If we made the Vanguard AP have a charge-up, where its base damage would be current and it can go higher if you charge at the cost of overall DPS, the its an upgrade not a downgrade. Its not some massively complex thing to work out, especially if you don’t have to worry about bullet drop.


    I am not heavily exaggerating the roundness. The center of the Magrider is big, then immediately drops down to half the hitbox size and then moved to less than 1/3rd of the thickness of the center of the Magrider. Here’s a picture as proof:

    [IMG]

    Which immediately exposes two things: you didn’t actually test anything in the game as it would be almost trivial to take a picture of the Magrider standing next to the other tanks in VR and that your vision of the Magrider relies on not showing the advantages I point out (the rounding).

    You think wrong.

    You mean you’ve seen many threads with VS copium and me shooting it down, but your cognitive dissonance doesn’t allow you to see that I am right.

    And again please show your tests. You have data like 5,3 seconds, you can only be that sure if you made a video and used the timeline. So you need to post that video, prove it. If you truly did the test you would have that proof on your PC right now, it should be trivial to upload it to youtube or another site and prove your point. Yet you haven’t so far because we both know you are lying.

    In case you want to dodge uploading a video, taking a screencap at two points showing the time at the start and halfway point should be proof. I say halfway point since if I ask for beginning and end you can just take a new video and leave the tanks standing still, then show a screencap of the correct times and pretend you circled. Thats a lot harder to do with a half-turn.