[Suggestion] Changing the tanks...

Discussion in 'PlanetSide 2 Gameplay Discussion' started by PLooschacK, Mar 3, 2013.

  1. PLooschacK

    While most of us focuses on saying how Prowler is \ isn't OP, I would like to talk about tanks overall. Especially since ESRL are coming. This time I will be speaking about MBTs, leaving Lightning to different times...
    1) Tanks durability...
    I think that Tanks lacks of toughness. Yet at the same time they are too tough after receiving hit to the rear. As we all know, tank that enters urban area w/o infantry support is destroyed tank. On the other hand, Infantry attacking tanks in open field... No exactly the ground pounders dream. Therefore I'd love to see some changes in armor values:
    Front Armor should be real pain in the *** for anything that tries to penetrate it. Yes, a bit smaller for example - for Decimator, but basicly there should be clear signal "If you want to fight me from the front, bring your tank with HEAT / AT Gun"
    Side Armor should be buffed a bit - making them capable of withstanding one more hit than it's now would be just fine.
    Rear Armor should be weaker. By far. I belive that after eceiving hit to the rear, you should be destroyed \ put into critical state by next hit. Even the one coming from the front.
    It would basicly put Tanks in roles of US Shermans (supporting Infnatry) during World War II, unless armed with AT cannon.

    Yes, I know it may encourage tankers to stay far and just bombard the facility, just as Prowler-dudes do today on daily basis. But I belive this is still a better situation than tanks just outside the spawn rooms, spamming HE at the shields. Mostly becouse it makes easier to initiate a counter-attack. And it syngeries with possible changes in base / spawn / territory design.

    And yes, I know there is still a matter of Rocket Pods, which would obliterate some tanks even faster than they do now. I have to think about this issue more - maybe solution lies not in Tank but ESF changes?

    2) Tanks accessabilty...
    Thais is all about "Where can I get one?" and "How much is for that tank, sir?"
    Well, I'm completly for making MBTs coming only form a) Warpgate, b) TechPlant. This would be perefect if SOE had introduced that Vehicle Carrier they were talking about. But until there is none, I'd go after 3rd option - abilitty to spawn them in Towers but at 50% higher price. Also, the base cost of the tank should be higher.

    Both changes (difficulty in obtaining tank and possibility of being obliterated nearly instanly should ) I mentioned above have one thing in common - they are trying to put Tanks in position where their Driver cares for his vehicle instead of treating it as expendable transport and farming options.

    3) Tanks vs Tanks
    I think that there is no need for great changes in pure tank warfare. The only one that is really needed is the buff to AT Cannons. It was brought multiple times in other threads that AT Cannons offers not enough when compared to HEAT Cannons.

    Also, since this point is all about cannons - two more things. Firstly, move Magrider's Main Cannon higher to that quasi-tower. Secondly, introduce 4th level of Combat Chass that gives Stabilizers for the Prowler \ Vanguard Main Cannons and ability to slightly turn Left<=>Right Mag's Main Cannon (45 degree max).

    4) Tanks Diversity...
    A lot of you, fellow players, will find this point bad, and getting the game more imbalanced. Yet I will share it with you. Note that this one should affect all ES Vehicles (currently MBTs and ESFs but maybe SOE will introduce more ES Vehicles):
    NC Vehicles should be able to use 2 Defensive Slots at the same time.
    TR Vehicles should be able to use 2 Performacne Slots at the same time.
    VS Vehicles should be able to use 2 Utility Slots at the same time.

    I know that NC's benefit may seem to be better than Trs and VSes one better than both - NCs and TRs. But it gets a bit weaker when you read about...

    5) ... Tanks Consumables!
    Yes! One of main reason is fact that it is damn hard to run out of Vehicle \ Air Resources while some classes (mostly Engineer) are constantly low or out of Infantry resources. Also, it reffers to Vehicle overall... But, let's get to the point!

    Vehicles should be using consubales just like infantrymen. Easiest examples:
    a) Smoke Launchers \ Flares - instead of making them unlimited in numbers but having cooldown, let's make them no cooldown and limit the number they can have in their Tank at one moment (just like grandes, C4s etc.). Higher levels allows players to carry more Smoke Grandes \ Flares and slightly lowers the cost of single consumable.
    b) Scout Radar - slightly limit the range of passive detection (for example to 75m at the final level) but add active detection - you would need to buy consumable (some kind of battery?) that for 1,5 seconds doubles radar's range. Higher certs increases passive detectiion range and makes active one longer by .5s per level.

    Of course this change can only be applied when SOE will introduce Vehicle Resupply System similar to one that Infnatry have.

    6) Manning the tanks.
    Last but not least - Tanks crew. This one will be short as it's basicly all about going back to PS1, making MBTs 3-man vehicle - secondary gunner, primary gunner and driver who should receive some kind of ES Kobalt-like machine gun, so the driver don't get bored too much ;) In Magrdier, that weapon should be placed where the Main Cannon is now - somwehere earlier in the post you can read about my idea to change place of Mag's Main Cannon.

    OK, that's all I can remember - as you might have noticed, frist two points are most important. Thanks to all of you who made it through all that text.

    P.S. From this point I would like to say "Thanks you" to SOE devs who increased Magriders plasma projectiles speed - SPC's, FPC's and PPA's :) Or I might be just delusional :)
  2. AnotherNoob

    I'm sorry, but I stopped reading after you made arguments based on ww2 tanks... Balance=/=realism. Do you have any idea how op aircrafts would be against tanks if they made the *** weaker?
    • Up x 2
  3. PLooschacK

    Well, I don't think you understand anything from what you read - mostly becouse up to the point you read it's all about buffing the tanks - Front and Side Armor stronger, and the reduction of Rear Armor won't chnage that much. Today Rocket Pods destroys tanks almost instantly. And note that when I reffer to "huge damage" from receiving hits in the rear I talk about AT weapons. Rise in damage of other weapons shouldn't be that high (although there are no doubts it's appearance). Moreover, whole Planetside 2 is one huge net of reliances - of course changes in one aspect have to be followed by changes in others. But one step at the time, I facus on MBT aspect for the ease of discussion.

    Also I did not made any arguments based on WW2 - example of Sherman was just as example, mase to let you imagine better the change in Tank's role. BTW, I will never agree that single Tank roaming the facility, shooting left and right, killing everything in sight IS balance. Yes, I belive that realism approach offers far greater ballance than the situation I described. Situation which we can see today. Not to mention nothing changed in matter of armor going into urban areas w/o infantry support. Just as it was 60 years ago, today it is just as bad idea...
  4. Kurreah

    MBTs are already killed from two hits in the back with some weapons. You might be able to weaken that a bit more to allow more weapons to 2-shot them, but you probably want to avoid allowing them to be one-shotted.

    The allowing of a tank to be crewed by just one person was a specific design decision made by the developers, and will not be changed now. One thing that they have mentioned is a cert that removes access to the main gun for the driver to give to the gunner, and gives access to more powerful guns.
    This may have been put on hold due to how easy it is for people to swap between the positions and still one-man-crew a tank.
  5. spunchron

    I'd like to see the CD time on the tanks increased, and I'd also like the lightning and MBTs to have a shared CD.
  6. PLooschacK

    No, I don't want them to be one shotted, and yes, I know 2 hits from the rear destroys a tank. Don't ignore the next sentence stating that next shot don't have to reach rear to kill the tank - it may be side or front (this one will put him on fire). Guard your rear, that's the price for buffing front and side armor. Not going forward blindly is small price for increased survivablity. Also, it would - along with the Smoke Launchers \ Flares being bought and not limited to one ever X seconds - be a solution for HA with lock-ons who are too far away to render. And would create a situation where Annihilator can be somweher between "Uber-Tool-OF-Destruction" and "Useless-Piecie-Of-Junk".
  7. AnotherNoob

    Please point me to the nearest urban area on auraxis...
  8. PLooschacK

    Yay, you have nothing meritoric to say so you will jump on wording. But as you wish - TechPlants and Amp Station are urban areas in terms of PS2, just as few bigger Outposts on Indar, Esamir or Amerish. Check the dictionary, one of it's meanings is:

    You failed at trying to be a ******** - "urban" does not mean only "city" or "town".
    If it makes you more comfotable, change "urban areas" to "built up areas".
    Not to mention that players want places with bigger and densier built up. And Devs seems to listen to them (which is not always the right thing to do, but it's completly different subject).
    • Up x 1
  9. Zorro

    These are some good ideas, but I disagree about making the rear weaker. The engine area should be a weak point, for sure, but it should be sufficiently armored so that it actually functions like a tank. Gameplay should certainly be based on realism, but one cannot forget that the game takes place centuries in the future.

    LOL! you get em! ;)

    I like your ideas. some of the details i disagree with (but hey, their details) but your over all idea seems like a good one.

    I would contend only one thing. If you want to make the MBT a 3 man tank, it should be incredibly more powerful. Especially if said 3 man tank is also much less accessible. basically I feel as though your ideas would make tanks much less accessible, and much more difficult to use (which is a good thing IMO) but that you diddnt provide any trade off for it. Yes, you wanted a small adjustment to the armor, but you basically called for seige mode tanks, since getting tot he rear of a tank, is ridiculously easy, and C4 is unaffected by placement.

    I would like the additions you just placed, but I would nix the rear armor reduction (2 hits to the rear already kills a tank), and increase the tank over all performance. I would drastically increase HE damage, and damage radius, but make it do zero damage to armor. I would drastically increase the AP rounds damage against armor, and I would leave the HEAT round alone, but reduce its effectiveness against MBT's and lightings. I would like to see a further defining of the MBT as a huge weapon capable of potentially turning battles, but making the trade off by giving them less accessibility, and more cost.

    In either case, I like your ideas. I just dont like that one (the rear armor reduction), as tanks are already WAY to easy to kill (from AT weapons, as well as aircraft), and i rarely ever get killed from frontal damage. Your ideas would also give the mag an incredible advantage.
    • Up x 1
  12. PLooschacK

    Of course, as it was pointed out earlier, PS2 is a net o reliances and this thread is just first of small series of suggestion threads I plan to post. It would be good move from SOE's side to make some kind of Test Server where top outfits and set amount random players drawn every monyh could play, share their toughts and eventaully - decide about final adjustments.

    And I completly agree that we would have to spend some time on other forms of destroying tank as my topic covers only the most direct aspect. For example, as an Engineer I vote for Tank Mines to be a) triggered by movement b) Engineer Tool should be able to disarm mines without triggering them c) change mine plating mechanics so i take a player to stand still for 3-5 seconds. Such changes would increase not only MBTs survivabilty but also Sunderers, Lightnings etc. and - IMHO - would make far more sense. perhaps even after such changes we would dicover that tanks indeed need for example - more HP. Or more defensive certs like some kind of reactive armor. Or keeping the Rear Armor as it is now ;) So the tanks still could be used as breaching force at the right time. But at this point I'm more than happy that people actually thinks about those changes and share their toughts and concerns.

    I also second the idea of making HE shells more specialize in their doing. Yes for splash radius increase.Dunno about damage and full damage radius. Perosnaly I belive that HE shell that lands in direct vicinity of enemy trooper should one kill him, unless that Trooper carries Lv5 Flak Armor.
    The only exception would the the Prowler with its dual cannons - landing hits with both of them should do around 150% of damage made by the other two MBTs (It should come along with the ability to fire both guns at the same time when in Anchor Mode). Firstly, becouse its higher rate of fire. Secondly, becouse it carries twice as many shells as other tanks. I think that giving it higher RoF, higher DPS and allow it to spend more time in the field is just too much. Or let the Prowler to take as many shells as other tanks - he will have more burst but lesser sustainability.
    Generally I think, and it stands against realism, that MBTs should be able to carry less ammo - this change would encourage player to Teamplay and would be barely noticeable for those who already knows that this game is designed for teamplay and cooperatioon ;) And for those who prefer solo, perhaps there should be a system that would allow players to load two types of ammo in their tanks and switching them with buttons "1" and "2" or with the "B" key. So players don't feel somehow punished for being lone wolves.

    And for the third time I have to agree with you about the Magrider's advantage but only under one condition - clear explanation of how the turrets on Vangauard \ Prowler works. Becouse from my experiences turret facing doesn't matter - so you can face the best front armor to the highest threat, whikle tracking your tagret with your turret w/o the risk to expose it's weaker side armor. And if that's true, than Mags woul still be disadvantegous becosue of having to turn their hull to aim. Okay, maybe those 45 degrees is too much, maybe it should be 30 degrees. And let's keep in mind it would at the expense of Hovering Frame - their ability to starfe and dodge shots.
    • Up x 2