July 8, 2024 - PTS Update

The test server is down at the moment, so I only got a short stint to boot up the PTS and try things out, but here are some of my initial thoughts on the headlines:

Scout Radar for a Sunderer here is not the same and has additional functionality from the a scout radar for a Scythe, so in my opinion they shouldn't share the same name.

I suggest trying to keep the naming convention for the performance slot to something more consistent across all options within this slot. That way when it does go live and people are talking about and learning the new changes, this completely new system and the related deployables shared in this slot have a consistent and distinct terminology. We're going to be vocally talking to each other in game in relation to these things a lot. Squad leads will be giving instruction to their squad members and requesting or suggesting certain kinds of cargo, deployment types, and armor. It will help to make their name distinct so we don't confuse each other constantly refer to things by the wrong name.

For example if we adopted the term "Cargo" to reference the new Sunderer deployables, instead of calling the performance slot upgrade the "Ammo Tower", rename it "Ammo Cargo"
"Repair Station" -> "Repair Cargo"
"Scout Radar" -> "Recon Cargo"
"Shield Disruptor" -> "Disruptor Cargo"

Remember, allied vehicles can be a "supporting element" as well. I anticipate with the current implementation in relation to vehicular open-field combat, the repair cargo is likely to be the meta choice to an extreme. Repair Cargo is the only thing with practical benefit for allied vehicles, and it also has a passive benefit for the Sunderer itself while on the move, where other Cargos do very little or nothing at all. This cargo system could be made more interesting and varied if the other three cargo options did more to support allied vehicles and to support itself while on the move without the cargo deployed.

For example, enhance the deployed ammo cargo to also accelerate reload time of the Sunderer and nearby allied vehicles in addition to granting ammo. This would naturally be a much greater benefit to allied tanks in particular, since armor has lot of single-round magazines that benefit more from reload reductions. Perhaps as a passive benefit to the Sunderer itself, it could gain a minor rate of fire increase to it's own top guns while the Ammo Cargo is not on cooldown.

You could also enhance the deployed shield disruptor cargo to allow projectiles fired from allied vehicles nearby the Disruptor Cargo to pierce through one shield. Think base shields, construction shields, outfit citadel shields, Sunderer deployment domes, infantry deployables, etc. As a passive benefit while the Disruptor Cargo is not deployed, you could give the Sunderer increased resistance to damage from collisions, falling, and being turned upside down (similar to the secondary benefit the existing GSD buff).

Lastly, you could enhance the deployed Recon Cargo to mimic the Lightning's existing Engagement Radar utility, but a longer range and for ground vehicles instead of aircraft. Perhaps allow this new engagement radar to disregard the sensor immunity granted by vehicle stealth defensive systems. Implementing a way to disregard sensor immunity by way of the Recon Cargo would be a good way to uniquely grant intel to your friendly armor. Vehicle stealth is the popular meta for a lot of different vehicles, so doing this adds counter-play to that meta and encourages players to try out alternatives to stealth for their own vehicles. You could also apply that same logic to allowing the Recon Cargo to also disregard the infantry Sensor Shield implant. Without adding counter-play to the Sensor Shield implant alongside this new Recon Cargo, I anticipate that implant will be become more mandatory for high level play than it already is.

I'm not a huge fan of the idea of the Sunderer losing it's passive repair centered on itself while the cargo is deployed. If I'm on the move and deploy my repair cargo in friendly territory, or the front line shifts. Do I now just permanently lose my passive repair unless I redeploy new cargo and then destroy it?

What if, instead of that passive toggling when the cargo is deployed, instead it toggles when the cargo is on cooldown. Then, leaving behind your cargo is not necessarily persistent factor. And should you manage to keep your cargo alive long enough and you stay in the same place for long enough, allied vehicles can benefit from a wider area in which they can get repaired, either from your cargo or from your sunderer, Though even in that case, I agree that the effect should not stack. The idea is just to add a secondary aura to which allies can go to receive repairs, if you keep your cargo alive long enough.

Doing it this way also encourages more thoughtful timing of your cargo deployments. If you place your repair cargo down in a heated fight without giving it cover, or while retreating, it will get quickly killed and you'll subsequently also lose your passive ability to repair allies until it comes off cooldown again. But if you withhold your cargo, you can still reliably give some weaker repairs.

The Reactive armor in particular I think could use another pass. The in-game description at the moment does a poor job of explaining how it works. It honestly feel like Reactive Armor's function is a bit convoluted and redundant in usage to the Enhanced Plating.

In some instances when trying to fire a bulldog from my Sunderer to the ground nearby while my dome shield was raised, my projectiles were originating above the shield and hitting my shield, rather than passing through.

So, I think the shield is a touch too low and needs to be raised a little bit. It also seems sometimes the shield is of an inconsistent size or not originating from a variable point on the Sunderer which may be the real issue. Parking on flat terrain versus sloped terrain might have something to do with this, but I couldn't nail down the issue.

I think less extremes may be worth testing. For the active burst, I think it should occur a bit more slowly or for a smaller total repair amount. And while that is on cooldown, I think the passive repair should be worsened but not completely inactive. Maybe a third or half of the normal rate. It's kind of hard for me to form a strong opinion on this without proper live testing with an actual armor fight, but at a glance it feels too drastic in both regards.

I disagree. I think your initial instinct to transfer this module as-is was correct. I think the cloak module is plenty powerful. Some bases always have and still will favor a stealth Sunderer. I think this may become even more true with deployment zones shrinking, and new options opening up for a-typical deployment spots.