Can we get a tank buff without sacrificing anything please?

It is bad in my opinion. I state these things not from anecdotal evidence, but from first-hand experience from friends who I urged to play early on only to be rebuffed after they tried it and said this game was lame from instantly dying before they even got a chance to shoot.

Those early impressions are crucial and not easily forgotten. A lesson SoE never understands.

PS1 had a nice balance. I'm talking about before the lame artillery and core combat. The amount of infantry moving about outside of bases was good. I hated early PS2 and I was a die-hard PS1 player simply because of the ludicrous vehicle spam and I'm sure other PS1 veterans felt the same way.

I left PS1 shortly after the stupid artillery. I use to lug that thing around and spam AMS' and other spawn areas point-blank with impunity because they never thought of the consequences. It was stupid, just like the tank spam in early ps2.

The game went downhill even faster than it was already heading.

Experience is a hard teacher: it gives you the test first and the lesson after. Sadly SoE fails the lesson even after the failed test.

No, let's be real, most tankers just want to be invincible against infantry and "feel" like a tank. Most infantry go after tanks with c4 so they don't destroy spawn points or just demolish everybody in sight.

And everybody seems to be acting as if the majority of tank deaths are from C4, the biggest culprit of vehicle deaths by far is tank mines which one shot you if you don't have a mine guard. Yet the weapon that requires next to nothing is fine judging from the lack of outcry, while the one that is most likely going to end in the death of the attacker is apparently just incredibly unbalanced.

Put simply, if you die as a tanker, bar a few situations, there's almost always something you could have done. Having a gunner is one of those things a lot of people overlook.

That's not entirely true actually ..

The biggest cause of MBT's deaths ( Last 30 days )

All factions added together :

AP Rounds : 88382

C4: 69919

Tank mines: 59329

http://ps2oraclestats.com/monthly-vehicle-deaths/

So what you're saying is that tanks are fighting tanks more commonly than anything else?

I'm not saying anything apart from he was wrong in his assessment that Tank mines were the biggest tank killers.

If other people want to dissect the stats and grab at straws etc etc that's up to them.

Last 30 days perhaps, but as far as I remember as a whole tank mines have far more kills. Even still, with a difference of only 10,000 you would think more people would be complaining about tank mines.

That said, I also find it ridiculous that everybody seems to think that they can only play infantryside, tankside, or airside. You have the option to become infantry any moment by pressing "E" if it's so hard to kill one light assault coming at you while he's using his jetpack. Here's a hint, it really isn't that hard to kill them because they can't really shoot back accurately.

But you don't even need to get out to kill an LA. You can survive by just driving away from them. You're always going to be faster than infantry, at least my stock Prowler is anyway, not certain about stock Vanguards. Just like in real life, distance is one of the best ways to protect yourself. People complain about the armor being weak so they can't go into the bases and blow stuff up, but that's what would cripple tanks in real life, going into a place full of buildings that they can't get an angle on with enemies potentially hiding everywhere, only took one lucky guy with a sticky substance and explosives to destroy the treads of a tank, leaving them vulnerable to the infantry.

It would be nice to have some power in this game as a tank driver... some scrub with a rpg takes out most of my health and i end up dying so quickly... and are tanks not meant to be a killing mech that is just a tank from dmg???

With the rocket launchers it's kind of a catch-22. Individual rockets are actually far weaker in this game than in most other games, but they're also common as dirt so you're constantly getting bombarded with them.

I do not have an answer. And honestly I don't think this is an easy question to answer.

One thing is sure: when we had stronger vehicles we had a different resources system and aquisition cooldown. So if your precious Vanguard was destroyed you could hardly go back to the base and restart the farming, you had to wait for some time. That time and those resources were the price to pay to have the power of a heavy battle tank with double specialized turret.
In the beginning vehicles were stronger, but they had to be used wisely. This led the Cod crybabies to disappointment because they had to wait 5 minutes before being able to farm again. Many were such suckers they just went AFK in the spawnroom until the cooldown expired and resources were restored... so in the end SOE changed the system. But they had to nerf tanks to balance the fact there was less downtime between tanks spawns.
Today we have paper made tanks, but there is no cooldown anymore. A fair trade, isn't it?

For sure I can tell tougher tanks should not be spawnable as often as they are today. There should be a price in using such a force multiplier, some kind of consequence. Personally I believe the last phase of the resources system could achieve this: you want to spam tanks? Ok, but as soon as you consume all the bases nanites pool you throw your faction into a big pile of ****.
Game designers should find a solution to this, before they can buff tanks again.

Those tankers who state they deserve a buff because tanks can be countered by C4 and landmines are just lying to themeselves and to the community. Or they are just incredibly stupid. With my loadout with maxed Scout Radar and with EOD HUD I have never been C4ed. Not even one single time.

Farming infantry with tanks is already bloody easy: should they buff tanks further under current resources system I can grant you would see my K/D take off to the sky. But imho this is not where this game has to go, it's the same mistake SOE made when they introduced BFR in Planetside 1: footsoldiers just played indoor, because when they had to face the new heavy vehicle footsoldiers were just farmed.

OK, that part about your friend is simply ******** (the TTK complaint, not the friend). I've heard that so often, and it doesn't get more true the more often it is repeated.
Play CS and CoD and you die even faster with less chance to react.
There are only two FPS that I can name that might still be "in use" that have slower TTK and that is Team Fortress and Unreal Tournament.
It is not because people die more easily, it is because there are not 4 or 8 or 32 threats that can kill you, there can be well over a hundred. And those threats can be a bit farther away than those CS corridors that are at most 30 metres long.
Also in CS, CoD, UT and even (to a smaller degree) TF you can wreck **** by going in solo terminator-style if you are skilled enough.
That does not work here.
It is not supposed to work.

Those (sorry about that, but I can't find a polite way to say it) whiney *******, who want a "wargame" but can't be bothered to check the surroundings for frigging enemy TANKS before leaving the spawnroom - they are not the people that PS can retain as customers. They have no interest in this game besides a fleeting curiosity. CoD and all those others simply do it better, and the market is sated.
But they are the ones that seem to dictate the direction development is going.
A direction that is alienating quite a lot of the people who actually HAVE an interest in this game and would be loyal customers for YEARS to come.
Why is that?
Whats the point in almost redesigning your gameplay to satisfy people that will mostly leave (if they ever arrived) because a newer game does it better?
Am I the only one thinking that this is a very.... strange way to decide whats gonna happen in development?

Edit: To add a bit of "business speak":
I think DGB are throwing away their core competence in this game to mimick features of half a dozen competitors.
I think its rather like developing a car that runs solely on solar power - just to add a combustion engine later because "marketing" shows that 99% of the world drive those and like the engine noise.

Good god, I forgot about those dumb BFRs.

I just remember that dumb flail.

SoE thinks these game components are all equalized in some sandbox environment when in reality there are always people who will find a mechanic and abuse it beyond what they "think" it should perform and/or interact.

It's not symmetrical and people always find an asymmetrical use for these things, then other people catch on and we have farming beyond belief.

You people just want to sit 100 yards back, with your zoom lenses, endless ammo and splash people like the dumb cert farming it was. Build up your k/d ratio to artificially dumb levels, artificially inflating your ego along with it while the player base shrinks even more.

Go ahead...

So many things wrong with what you just said its not even funny.

Why thanks. I'm glad we can finally agree on something because I wasn't trying to be funny.

But you prove my point. Why YOU may not do that and YOU might think it's wrong, those asymmetrical people will if we go back to tank 1.0. No risk, all reward, I like that. I did that.

WHY CAN'T YOU QUOTE ON THE FORUMS, you look like your talking to yourself.

Well, I know this is a broad assumption, but most people will naturally scroll up to the thread or threads above to see how the conversation has unfolded.

However, it is my policy to not directly quote dumb people and I stand by my original assessment and policy as your most recent post has, yet again, proved my point.

Seriously mate it just makes you look like youre trying to get a last word in without actually having anything to say, and without the other guy noticing.

Yes, Scr1nRusher is a bit of a lunatic, but he is most certainly not the worst to... 'grace' theese forums.

Yeah, that'd work. I do want more ideas for unique base layout, even if it's with the same resources. A tower that is used for a vehicle gate, for instance.

Well dah, obviously you just make fortress designed for using tanks at closer range/inside. PS1 had it to certain degree, courtyard could be dominated with armour, this general idea could be developed further.

And no, tanks can shell you even with 50/50 pop. At many bases all paths from spawnrooms to CC are open, West Highlands is a good example. Best way to clear attacker is to redeploy and unleash you own tank wave or place AV nests around and fragile tanks fit this "meta" very well.

Yes, of course can shell you in a 50/50 fight. Usually though they will be busy with other stuff or it will be temporary.
If you're in a 50/50 fight and the tanks shell you from 3 or 4 sides though - well I've never seen that happen, not even with magriders.

This was because you had to trade specializations.... want to be a vehicle driver? Then you are giving up Heavy weapons, Special weapons, Maxes, etc. You could only access certain playstyles. In PS2, you have access to all playstyles if you have enough certs. So, I... as a BR100... can do everything and anything I want. Only during the later twilight years of PS1 did most everyone have enough certs for everything (when they upp'd the max level and certs with it).

I really thought they missed the boat with the specializations. They could have implemented a similar system that allowed you to focus on various categories, in exchange for other categories. Would you give up access to Heavy Assault class in order to pull tanks? (I would, others wouldn't even think about it... there you go... limited access to vehicles) Systems like this could have limited tanks. Nope, SOE decided everything should have the option of doing anything.