[Suggestion] Emplaced MBT Turrets

Discussion in 'PlanetSide 2 Gameplay Discussion' started by ColonelChingles, Jul 25, 2016.

  1. JKomm

    While I love the idea of faction specific anti-vehicle constructs, this doesn't really fit with the game itself and has some issues of balance to attend to. What I mean is... where would these surplus turrets come from? Tanks are built on demand in seconds, when they are destroyed they are decommissioned in seconds... nothing gets left over.

    It'd save a lot more grief just by starting from scratch rather than trying to strap a cannon onto a tower and call it a day, it'd also add much more to the game. If I want to protect a base with a Prowler turret, I'd grab a Prowler itself, may not have the survivability but it'll have the mobility to go where it's needed. What I'm trying to say is... this doesn't really add to the game, it just changes something a little bit.
  2. ColonelChingles

    Not all things in PS2 get permanently destroyed. For example, generators, terminals, and SCUs stay even though they are destroyed. They're probably made out of the same things that tanks are, given how nanites can repair both from the brink of destruction. Maybe some MBT parts remain after destruction as well.

    Alternatively, it still has to be cheaper to build just a turret instead of the whole tank. If an MBT costs 450 nanites, then a turret should be a fraction of that cost (even in cortium).

    It's hard to say given what other options there are if you "start from scratch". Maybe they will be fantastic.

    In terms of the emplacements versus the tanks, in general emplacements have the following advantage over tanks:
    1) Cost
    2) DPS
    3) Armour
    4) Close-in anti-infantry defenses

    Tank have the following advantages over emplacements:
    1) Mobility
    2) Can mount a secondary weapon

    You're right in that the emplacements don't revolutionize the game, they essentially are stronger, more dangerous Spear turrets. Instead it is a change that affects the defensive value of bases, namely because Spear turrets are a tab weak at the moment. An MBT emplacement would be able to hold its own against an equal number of MBTs.
  3. JKomm

    Seems to me that we can easily scrap this idea for a general Spear turret buff instead, would make things a little more balanced. Since facility turrets were buffed to have extraordinary heat thresholds, I think base turrets should be given slight advantages over them... say for instance a higher rate of fire? Doesn't make much sense that these exact same turrets overheat so much more quickly, generally speaking they have a much larger base structure over facilities(Which are generally a small platform).
  4. ColonelChingles

    If you ask me the Spear turret design is problematic to begin with, especially from an armour and damage standpoint.

    [IMG]

    For starters, it only has a 120mm cannon, the same as the Prowler's. This makes sense as both designs use an "off centre" mount, which suggests that recoil can't be that significant for a mounting of this type. If anything the current Spear turret does a bit too much damage, doing 1,550 instead of the Prowler's 1,250. Granted not all 120mm shells are the same and barrel length can make a difference even with the same shells, but by all means it should be rather anaemic.

    The base itself is pretty lackluster. Nothing about it screams that it would carry the armour of an MBT. It most it reminds me of the sort of defensive turrets you'd find on naval ships, which are only lightly armoured.

    In terms of role the Spear turrets would be more like the AT guns of WWII. Meant for ambushes, carrying only medium-grade weapons (for the most part) and only lightly armoured.
  5. Dieter Perras

    what if the vs turret is the only one capable of arising and lowering? allowing it to peak over cover and fire?
  6. ColonelChingles

    So I've been playing around with bases and tanks, and there are a few novel ways to put your MBT inside a base.

    One method is to use the the Rampart Walls and a Structure Shield Module. Friendly tanks can actually fire through the shielded slits, which means that you can fire on the enemy with fairly little risk of return fire. The downside to this is that you can only hit closer targets... if the enemy is too far away then the low height of the slit means that you cannot increase your elevation without hitting the wall itself.

    The other method is to build a Vehicle Ramp on the inside of your base, meeting a Rampart Wall. This allows a tank to drive up the ramp and fire over the wall. While this is effective against distant targets, it is much worse against closer targets because the tank is unable to depress the cannon low enough to engage closer targets. The tank is also extremely exposed to incoming fire, at least until it can roll back down the ramp.

    Overall these two methods show how a tank can play from inside a base, though you still have the problem of a vehicle operating inside a very cluttered environment. The risk of running over other defenders in a base is a bit high to be running a tank out of it.

    Anyhow...
    [IMG]

    Finally the Vanguard idea. Instead of using the traditional Vanguard turret, designers opted to reuse existing Vanguard-R turrets. The Vanguard-R turrets are not only much more balanced than the lopsided Vanguard turrets, but as only 8 were ever deployed there was a tremendous surplus of them sitting around.

    The primary weapon is a 155mm Gauss-assisted gun meant for hitting very, very hard. It is the heaviest piece of weaponry on Auraxis at the moment. The downside is that the Gauss mechanism requires time to recharge, lowering the firerate over the traditional Titan 150mm series. Velocity is also higher than a conventionally-fired weapon.

    It is also equipped, as with the TR and VS variants, with close-in anti-infantry weapons, two 12.7mm Kobalts.

    The Vanguard emplacement carries over with it the Vanguard Shield, though the technology has been fused with the ANT's C-Barrier. The shield will absorb damage, in exchange running on the emplacement's internal cortium storage. While granting near invulnerability to the Vanguard emplacement while active, a gunner must be careful not to burn through the cortium or risk turning the emplacement into a harmless structure. The shield can be activated or deactivated on demand, but carries with it an initial activation cost.

    The other option is Advanced Capacitors, which will create a short delay before firing (similar to the Railjack). Although this can impact aim and slows the rate of fire even more, the advantage is that it increases velocity and damage tremendously. The Advanced Capacitors can be activated or deactivated on demand.

    Yes, it would so long as the "Maglev" utility is selected. This would allow the Magrider to "float" in a box over the base.