Higby: Return of the Tankside

Discussion in 'PlanetSide 2 Gameplay Discussion' started by BlueSkies, Jan 16, 2015.

  1. Auzor

    Thank you for the post;
    for clarity nr 2: it is the health pool that would be buffed.
    Example: current mbt: 4000 HP. -> +30%: 5200 HP.
    Bad balancing; sundy resists should be tweaked downwards; and vanu complain that +30% health benefits their mbt the least:
    Prowler has dps advantage,
    and vanguard benefits slightly more from HP increases due to better armor. Then again, the relative value of the shield decreases.

    I'm afraid mr Higby is due for replacement..
    Per above, +HP has relative differences, but ok.
    But why would the lightning be buffed relative to mbt's?
    It is crucial to understand that the lightning has some pretty important differences from mbt's for taking damage:

    Front armor gives lightning +10% dmg reduction, for 75%. Prowler: 63%+5%: 68%. The way to look at this: with extra armor, lightning takes 25% dmg from front, prowler 32%. A relative difference of 28%, which approximately cancels out the prowlers HP advantage for equal resistance weaponry. In addition, the lightning is harder to hit, and easier to repair (less dmg taken= faster to repair).

    Extra Side armor: 73% vs 68%. 27% dmg taken vs 32%.

    Additionally, resistance multipliers:
    lightning has better multipliers for:
    C4 (will be tweaked to prevent 2x C4 death? ignore for now)

    AV explosive: AV mine and AV grenade: -50 vs -100. Meaning mbt takes 33% extra dmg compared to lightning.
    Per current, vs AV grenade for example, that makes both take equal damage relative to their health pool. However, lightning gets better armor upgrades, for a potential lightning advantage in game already vs AV grenade (OK). Lightning apparently would get more extra hp than mbt-> Lightning > mbt vs AV grenades and AV mines.
    Because of the lower multiplier, lightning also has a far better mineguard if I read the numbers correctly. (haven't checked if mineguard also still works vs AV grenade).

    HMG: 75% vs 70%. So, mbt takes an extra 20% dmg relative to lightning. If mbt gets 20% extra health, and lightning 30%, how do effective health levels stack up: (comparatively only!)
    mbt: 4000*1.2/0.3=16.000
    lightning: 3000*1.3/0.25=15.600 Lightning and mbt become approximately equally resistant (2.5% difference in mbt favor) vs HMG.
    However, the lightning can turn this around with the better extra armorings. Also, the lightning remains harder to hit.

    Light anti armor ordnance: 30% resist vs 20%.
    mbt: 4000*1.2/0.8=6000
    lightning: 3000*1.3/0.7=5571. Ok, mbt advantage. But far smaller than the "advertised" 3000 vs 4000 hp.

    mbt has advantage vs AP rounds;

    Armor piercing MG: 55% vs 41%
    mbt: 4000*1.2/0.59=8135
    lightning: 3000*1.3/0.45=8667
    The lightning becomes slightly more durable than the prowler/magrider vs Vulcan and Tankbuster, in addition to being harder to hit, and having the option to increase the gap with better front or side extra armor.

    Rocket pods (incl hornet missiles, and possibly some valk weapons. Don't know the Liberator Duster..) 40% vs 20% resist.
    mbt: 4000*1.2/0.8=6000
    lightning: 3000*1.3/0.6=6500. Yep, another lightning win. Admittedly, lighting "wins" tend to be by small margins, but still..

    Liberator cannon: -33 vs -50% dmg. Liberator OP! :D
    3000*1.3/1.33=2932. Very small mbt advantage.

    The vortex is also unique, according to the wiki:
    Level: lightning mbt:
    1 -14 8 clear mbt advantage
    2 -75 -115 ah, lightning advantage
    3 -200 -190 Derp a herp, mbt advantage.

    Nerf Higby, replace by someone that implements mouseyaw.
    BTW: several items in the depot are 40% off.. (varies, but mostly 40%)
    Do you see an alert in the tweets on the forums? NOPE. Something on the SoE site? NOPE. Do these people want to make a living or?
  2. Auzor

    3x C4 is cost (nanite) prohibitive.

    IMO: 1 c4 anywhere, +1 c4 on the rear= tank destroyed.
    The should be able to implement that.
    • Up x 2
  3. MarkAntony

    These changes are bad and the devs should feel bad.
    • Up x 2
  4. Hatesphere

    C4 should have been directional from the start honestly. maybe something like this


    small area on rear that can still be hit from above, but the whole top tank surface not counting as full damage, back plate is full C4 damage, and a small area under the tank so that if it tank drives directly over C4 used as a trap and it is detonated at the right moment will also cause full damage (unless you have mine guard). C4 on any other part of the tank would have drastically reduced effectiveness and take normal armor facing into account. so if you are just backing away from a guy who chucks it and it hits your front armor its not going to do much damage, if someone sneaks up on you and managed to get two sticks or you drive over a trap you are toast. just clipping a tank with the explosion should do almost nothing.
    • Up x 3
  5. WTSherman

    I think we might have done it, Forumside, we've finally driven poor Higby insane.


    If these changes go through though I might enjoy my tank being OP for a little while.
  6. \m/SLAYER\m/

    2 c4 + rocket, only HA has RL
  7. Shatters

    All you need to counter vehicles is a few AV maxes, 1 engineer and a medic on a high point (pretty much every base). You simply take down 1 tank at a time while the tanks either have to retreat to cover or die.

    Also, if you ever try driving a MBT, then you will notice the MBT doesnt have a scout rader... And the radar it has does have only has 50m range on max level (meaning by the time you spot the enemies it is to late already.

    Also, if you actually charge ahead in a MBT, you will be dead within seconds. If you drive a MBT you would know that.
  8. Lynxord

    The Magrider is godly... it can out maneuver every other vehicle. Just because it doesn't do as much damage doesn't mean it's the worst. The Prowler and the Vanguard can only move forwards and backwards. The Magrider can glide omni-directionally and is extremely difficult to land hits on without lock-ons even with inexperienced drivers.
  9. lothbrook

    These changes all sound good to me, infantry should not be out ranging tanks, and 1 shotting them with C4, its time tanks were pulled to fight tanks.
  10. Xind

    I agree with that sentiment but is removing infantries ability to fight tanks at range really going to encourage Armor v Armor conflicts? Or merely increase the already overwhelming at times feeling of tank superiority against ground forces. (I do support infantry/MAXs having range capped at the render limit, they should not be invisible while fighting vehicles)

    Secondly, unlike NC and VS, TR only has AV Mana turrets as long ranged infantry AV...Fractures, Pounders and the Striker really don't have the same effect as Ravens or Lancers.
  11. HadesR

    But by the sounds of things one faction will still be able to out range tanks by a huge degree ... So if Higby wants these changes then he needs to add a bit of parity and make said changes fair across the board ..

    If he can't add that parity then he needs to not change anything at all ..

    But NC are losing the range on the Ravens .. Leaving only the Lancer ( and Vortex's to a lesser degree ) .. Seems a bit off to me that 1 / 3 of the factions retains a huge range advantage in the infantry AV department
    • Up x 3
  12. lothbrook

    I think its safe to say they aren't going to just leave certain things out, its ******* twitter, you have 140 characters. Not to mention all the ground lock ons reach out further than the phoenix which is what i think you meant when you said ravens? But once all the lone wolfs realize they can't just C4 anything that comes near them, yes they will start to pull vehicles, course who knows maybe now that tanks don't feel they'll be instantly vaporized for being within 50 feet of infantry they'll get hit with more C4 anyways.
  13. travbrad

    Yep one of the problems with infantry play in this game is that Heavy Assault is basically the "master of all trades, jack of none". There is literally no downside to playing Heavy Assault and this change just makes it even more appealing to play HA instead of other classes, especially LA.
  14. lothbrook

    I also don't feel bad for the LA at all, C4 should have never been given to them in the first place, they should be lucky they have any on demand anti tank power at all let alone the instant death they've wielded till now.
  15. BlueSkies

    hrm... tanks to fight tanks...

    Ok. Cool. So tanks will now do 0 damage to infantry and air right? :rolleyes:
    • Up x 1
  16. travbrad

    Instant death only if you are bad and don't check your surroundings. Tanks have 3rd person view, thermals, and even radar if you want. All this change does is reward bad tank players.
    • Up x 1
  17. BengalTiger

    Perhaps he'll be auraxing some tank gun next?
    • Up x 5
  18. Hatesphere

    there is a valid complaint against light assaults bailing from ESFs just to kill tanks with C4. no amount of situational awareness can really do much against that tactic, and the resources expended is not a good argument for a tactic like this.
    • Up x 1
  19. Fleech

    everyone has been waiting for this.

    no brainer.

    this has to be a joke. tankers haven't been asking for HP buffs. at most they've been asking for resistances to specific weapons they find annoying in general but a straight up health increase across the board is completely unnecessary overkill. SOE, you want tanks to be kill-able right?

    again, what?

    most tankers asked for a single brick to do closer to 50% or 60% damage. not making light assaults only AV options useless against most heavy armor now. this will further nerf the light assault class and make killing tanks a huge hassle for everyone but HA.

    this is silly SOE.

    please don't make the only thing i enjoy in this game easy mode. i don't want to be seen in the same light as the ESF's by players.
    • Up x 7
  20. Get2dachoppa

    Yup. I have a serious problem with game design that allows for "force multipliers" like tanks and aircraft that can almost literally be spammed at will. You want spammable tanks, they should be relatively soft. This change would make tanks stronger and just as spammable. Horrible decision. And it further elevates the Heavy Assault as the one class to rule them all. Vehicle spam is the leading cause of me logging out of this game - this change goes through and I'll likely be done with this game for good.