It's not underrated, its a fun thing to drive around and play, issue is that it's actual impact on the battle is very low unless you stick the top 1% of the actual dedicated users in one. And even than your impact highly revolves around how much actual reliance on Sundy's is there. Which is why my suggestion was to keep the current 2/2MBTs and create, on the same chassis, with the same health pool/resistances/upgrades but different turrets on top of them, more mobility and stabilized guns with a bit faster reload ... the 3/3ABT. Hell, we can even share the upgrade slot cert progression this way ... Lowest effort, but everybody get's what he wants ... the alternative is an NS 3/3 MBT ... Higby once said during late beta that we will get dedicated Driver/Gunner versions of our MBTs in form of a turret choice ... soon after launch. Through this never happened ...
I don't believe stats are an accurate representation of actual balance. The Vanguard is objectively the best ground-based vehicle hunter in the game in experienced hands in all but the worst terrain, and regardless of how many stock Vanguards are pulled for free food to the opposing side, there'll always be the small handful of certed Vanguards that tend to do extremely well against other vehicles -- so much so that it feels unfair to Magriders / Prowlers. I've lost count of the number of times I've been denied a Vanguard kill at range because of their ridiculous get-out-of-jail-free nonsense, and bumping into a stealth Vanguard at close range is pretty much a cheap, effortless kill for the Vanguard as opposed to the tense and exciting close-range AV brawl that it should be. It's just so painfully stupid. So, so painfully stupid. Really, they scale too well with their shield as it stands, and the shield itself is the only viable option for the tank. It makes fire suppression utterly redundant, for instance -- fire suppression is mostly used to give tanks more survivability in a pinch, but the Vanguard's shield does so with exponentially more effectiveness. Until that changes, I couldn't care less about whatever laughable stats are pulled, or anything else about the tank.
As for the Prowler, HEAT / HE nerfs are largely inconsequential. AP is fine for killing infantry and mandatory for effective AV. You're gimping yourself by rolling with a certed HEAT / HE in most scenarios that don't involve mind-numbing tower farms. The Vulcan's buff is nothing short of underwhelming. The weapon is, as has been mentioned countless times, conceptually flawed. It's magnitudes worse at killing infantry than the Enforcer / Saron at most ranges, and its TTK and effectiveness against vehicles is marred by various problems that single-shot rocket-type weapons don't suffer from. It requires almost no skill to use, and yet its performance is appalling. It was bad before the balance pass on Prowlers, and it's shockingly bad now. Since it can't get any worse, however, I suppose there's some hope for a change in the next few months. The unverified Marauder buff is all well and good, but it's not enough to compensate for its shell drop. It'll still be largely useless, since CQC with infantry is a death sentence.
I have been thinking about shield up/side grade options for ages (will continue to do so till almost everyone is happy). I have been thinking about FS and other utility options.... FS also needs a buff for land Vehicles (half way between the current FS and what the ESF percentage added). What if you mixed the current FS with the Shield, in my eyes you would get this. Aegis Armoured Defence System, 15 Second timer, +5% to side armour, +10% to top and front armour. Doubles Current health of the Vanguard increases 25% per level. (This makes it roughly the same however it needs a drawback.) 2 Second wait till it is in effect, (Change the Blue "effect" into armour plates rearranging themselves) Once AADS has ended it reverts back to normal armour, but -50% the current health when it was in AADS. Stats per level -> Just in case people cannot understand me (also easier to understand). Base level. = 15 Second timer, 2 Second wait till it is in effect, Millisecond countdown till activation in HUD, (Change the Blue "effect" into armour plates rearranging themselves). Level 1 +25% of Current HP when the plates align. +1% Side, 2% top and front 60 second cool down. - Level 2 +50% of Current HP when the plates align. +2% Side, 4% top and front 55 second cool down. - Level 3 +75% of Current HP when the plates align. +3% Side, 7% top and front 50 second cool down. - Level 4 +100% of Current HP when the plates align. +5% Side, 10% top and front 45 second cool down. This would make it if you got flanked you don't have an I win shield (LA's also have 2 seconds to blow the C4). Thus It would function for a decent time while having a downside that most people want. Vanguards now can effectively use the Enforcer to the best of its abilitys (instead of relying on Halberd for Alpha). The Shotgun and the AI version of the tank can get closer to the Battlefield without worrying too much about getting insta killed. If we were to have gotten a long resist shield, repair sundys would be able to keep us immortal. FS would be used/useful in OH $#!* moments where this would be best once you have planned your movements. P.S. If NAA gets nerfed to 12 seconds I will be abandoning it and going back to mineguard, (so I don't have to watch the ground).
Then you're wrong, basically. Whilst the stats can sometimes be misleading they aren't wrong (the data in the case of PS2 is basically 100% accurate), and are the best balance tool by far (arguable the only balance tool in fact). The Vanguard does well with experienced crew vs noobs, but so does the Prowler and the Mag. The stats show quite clearly that the Van is NOT "objectively the best ground-base vehicle hunter", although that is its strongest role, never mind the best MBT. The also seem to show, when the period of time when the shield was bugged and not working properly was taken into account, that the Van is only on levelish ground because of the shield (at the time mentioned its stats took a serious dip below both the Prowler and Mag - and currently it seems to be the shield that is propping it up).
If stats can be misleading, then that means they aren't 100% accurate. Stats, of course, are good for judging relative effectiveness of weapons, but they don't show the complete picture. They may tell you that "X tank is getting the most infantry kills", but they don't tell you -why-. Is it because the tank fires faster? Has a bigger splash? Or is it because that tank is simply used more in infantry battles? Does the side perceive their tank as being weak against other tanks, and instead decides to use it to farm infantry? Stats can only tell you so much. And I'll agree with you here. A Vanguard without a shield is at a disadvantage against a Prowler. The problem is that a Vanguard -with- a shield curbstomps it. If the Vanguard really is performing poorly compared to other MBT's, giving it an iWin button only masks the actual problem by skewing battles in its favor in spite of the tank's flaws. If the tank gets a buff, which it may need, then the shield must be changed in a manner that's more than simply shaving a few seconds off the time it lasts. At least the Vanguard has a useful ability. Anchored Mode is pretty much worthless in a tank vs. tank fight. Personally, I'd love to see a Berserker mode for the Prowler that increases its rate of fire drastically for a short amount of time, then burns the turret out for a bit so you can't fire afterwards. In my personal, perfect world, this would be balanced in such a way that if a Vanguard and Prowler both pop their abilities at the same time and pump shells into each other, by the time both run out, both tanks would be at equal HP.
This is probably one of the most crazy shield redesigns i've seen yet, lol. The buff this would confer is actually way stronger than the current shield due to the 100% (=4k) HP increase in combination with a resist increase. +10% front armour would translate into a 45% increase in EHP by itself. If you throw front armour on, you'd be able to buff your EHP to a mindblowing 44k. Just for the record, a standard mag (front) has 10.8k EHP. Also, you didn't mention how long you'd like this monstrosity to be up If you want others to actually DPS through it, you'd need 3-4 tanks to take a single vanguard out lol.
The data is 100% accurate, but people don't always account for everything, however that's not to say they are alway misleading, they just can be (and usually someone points out why). Your example above is actually a good example of this, in a toe to toe fight a Vanguard with shield will likely beat a Prowler, but statistically it shows that toe to toe fights don't account for enough to skew the overall picture (or rather Prowler do well enough at other ranges/in other situations for it not to). If you're looking at everything it makes sense, but if you're just concentrating on one part (toe to toe) it doesn't. Anchor isn't as good in a straight fight, certainly, but then it has other advantages, conversely in a medium to longer range fight even the shield doesn't overpower the Prowler speed, mobility and firepower in general. Another example would be NC running many more Lightning than TR or VS. Why? Because Vanguard AI is terrible comparatively.
Crap I forgot that (the resist values)... (also it says it lasts 15 seconds). You flank before he put up his "Shield" he is dead, 2 seconds (from behind) is enough to kill a Vanguard with this shield (because it X2 current health). That said I will need to drop something because it currently IS way to strong. The 2X current health I believe is a valid choice because of these reasons. Vanguard has 1000 health then activates the shield bang he now has 2000 (1250, 1500, 1750 for other levels) health, however if he say takes 1000 damage. Once the AADS ends he will be on 1000 (250, 500, 750) health.... This means even if you shoot his front armour while AADS is up he is only taking half damage, but that is still significant. *Modifications* (additions if these don't work (not acceptable) I shall have to play with numbers ). 20KPH slower during transition - 10KPH slower after, -65% hull turn rate during transition - -35% after, Turret traverse is also 50% less of normal. Rear armour is reduced by 10% while active. Maybe make the AADS take 3 seconds instead of 2 to activate. This modification will allow flankers to annihilate a AADS from behind while also allowing the Vanguard to soak damage if not flanked. 1 Heavy could take out a Vanguard if the heavy did it right. Vanguard cannot run away with his *** showing or run away from Vehicles because of the speed penalty's... 2 LD Prowlers or even 1 LD and 1 normal could take out a Vanguard with AADS (from front and sides). One problem is Magriders... They don't have any good DPS option unless they are close and flanking.... That said with current Modifications 2 Magriders that are skilled should not lose to a Vanguard (of equal or less skill).
Actually, you need at least 3.25 secs to kill a vanguard from behind. Mags cant oneshot it. Some quick notes: 1. You should not actually assume that the shield is something that can be shot at by other tanks. It's pretty much always the worst option unless you heavily outnumber the vanguard simply due to how close the TTKs are without the shield. So, firing on the vanguard while the shield is up means wasting your shots while exposing yourself to its fire, and thus it's pretty much guaranteed death (unless the vanguard is not good/in a really bad spot). This makes increased uptime extremely problematic, as it means the vanguard has a lot more time to miss/shoot you, or you have to hide for way longer. 2. Increased HP is not a problem, imo. The shield is pretty much unbreakable for tanks anyway atm, so increased hp would primarily buff AI performance. 3. I don't think paying for these buffs with crippling movement speed nerfs is going to be appreciated by many as movement debuffs are frustrating as hell. They would however be required for something that is this powerful.
They are pushing back the April update ... because of community feedback. One can hope that this is because of the really bad changes to Tanks ...
True the Magrider cannot kill the Vanguard in that 2.5 (more balanced than the 2sec one) sec windup window, however the Vanguard wont last long after the Armour is active anyway.. 1. People shoot at the shield anyway, so may as well help them sure the shots are going to do half damage however that is still quite a bit considering the Vanguard driver has to hop out of his tank and cannot run away to repair in a safe location (because of the movement debuff). 2. I know this and that is why the my HP armour is a better solution than armour/invincibility. 3. Yes slower speed is always a bad thing however... that's only mostly in the 2.5 seconds between button press and plate arrangement. It is only just slightly worse than normal, also they can be negated by what frame you pick.. Pick racer and you won't suffer as much from speed decrease. Pick Rival and you won't suffer much while turning, but have less top speed.
Hrm... first of all... from someone who's seen accuracy numbers that are impossible be displayed on the official stats site for months (Accuracy figures counting all repair/heal guns as misses... I mean really?) or Shotguns haveing 120% accuracy... (really... greater than 100%?... uhuh... sure). I'm not willing to give you the fact that the data provided by SOE is 100% accurate. However, Even if I grant you that point, the limited scope of the data available to us can paint an incomplete picture. First of all, there have been sweeping changes in all the MBT systems since release. So historical data will be skewed because of this. So, now we have to use shorter timeframe data... which is more likely to be skewed by localized population figures, it doesn't have the benefit of shear population to average out the inconsistencies. Realize we are trying to use certain statistics to balance a vehicle that is part of a large complex system. Results from battles that are not finite. If an AV mana turret does 80% damage, yet a Magrider kills that Vannie... A kill stat will show a Magrider killing a Vanguard. It will show the same as a Magrider killing a Vanguard outright doing 100% damage. Mags will probably last longer on average on Mattherson (higher overall VS population) than they would on Waterson (low overall VS population). As will the total numbers pulled (resource issues) and total numbers pulled concurrently (less resources, means more drivers without the ability to pull one)... Things like Air superiority, availability of prey (Matty TR doesn't have the same number of Tanks rolling as other TR servers), and/or combined numbers of players.... A low overall pop server will have different numbers than a high population server... less overall numbers mean more 1-12 fights than 48+ fights... and we all know the tanks perform differently based on overall number participating in a fight. So, even assuming the exact data points given to us are 100% accurate... All statistics are interpreted from the data... therefore, are subject to error and mistakes. The main issue I have with all of the using of statistics to argue over balance is this one, true, underlying issue. SOE doesn't release all the statistics available to them. The player community has very little access to detailed stats like Vanguard v Magrider kill stats.... Vanguard v Prowler Stats, etc. So any conclusions interpreted from the data we do have... are incomplete at best and most likely very misleading and outright false at worst. This is where experience and observation are needed to help interpret the data. Its also why some of us so easily discount the "black and white" conclusions that are thrown around on the forums.
It doesn't cover everything, certainly, but that is absolutely no reason to therefore disreguard every-single-thing about it either. The stuff we have access to is what is happening across the servers, like it or not.
People, you need to forget about using stats to compare everything. Keep in mind that stats can be increased/dropped by a number of players that aren't very good, or are just shooting at static tanks etc... What needs to be taken into account are actual players between players of a similar skill level, and if you look into this a bit, then yes, the vanguard is the tank that performs the best in tank vs tank situations. As a comment, I don't personally think that the vanguard shield would be unbalanced if it resisted different damage from different directions. Because currently, what causes you to loose to vanguards when in a magrider or prowler, is that if you manage to get behind them, the shield can allow them to undo their mistake and face you with little to no damage taken. Now while mechanics like this are fine, such as the magburner for a magrider, I still think that they should allow you to fix errors you've made, but still be able to be damaged by the enemies as a punishment for making the mistake of allowing the enemy tank shoot you in the back.
Lets hope Forumside's reaction to this last tank update has been very negative Lets hope they rethink these unnecessary nerfs.
I'm sure they're just trying to figure out how to nerf the halberd so everyone won't just switch over to it.
Nerf Damage till we cannot hurt infantry. Then buff us so we cannot be taken out by infantry. Solved. XP
Yeah and that awful AV engy turret update. Hey, its my skyguard's only AV option right now. But seriously. Of course the update is taking in a lot of criticism. Air is currently the dominating power. They got some great stuff to improve their quality of life and then some, and, while I don't think they need a nerf, I am one among many tankers who is offended that the next update nerfs us. We're not the culprits, we're the victims. The april update said that they were going to look at the lightning main cannon balance. Maybe they were finally going to impliment some changes (like velocity) that we have been suggesting for months. No? Just nerfing the viper? ugh... I'd totally agree with a viper nerf since its previous buff was ********, but I'm expecting the underperforming cannons to be brought up if the one good cannon is being taken down.
