[Vehicle] Making Room for the Upcoming ESB

It's time for another episode of "Crazy Talk from Degenatron"!

Disclaimer #1: A lot of you are going to hate this idea. That's OK! Please don't just tell me "That's crazy talk D-Gen!", because I already know that. Be more specific.

Disclaimer #2: I grabbed all of the info off of the PS2 Wikia - so if I have something out of whack, let me know and I'll fix it.

Purpose: The number one goal of this idea is to avoid that "What are we supposed to do with this thing?" type of reaction that happen with the Valkyrie. The second goal is to better define ground vehicle roles which will in turn give players a better sense of the type of threat a vehicle poses at a quick glance.

First, a handy-dandy chart:


So the obvious first: the Sunderer, MBTs, and Flash remain unchanged.

The ESBs are placed between the Harasser and the Lightning.

The Harasser: The HP for the Harasser takes a big nerf on this deal. This is to redefine the Harasser to be closer to the role it had in Planetside 1. In PS1, the harasser was only equipped with a light machine gun and it was and Anti-Infantry Vehicle. The changes I'm proposing pushes it back into that role, and allows the new ESBs to take over the role of the Fast Strike Anti-Vehicle Buggy. The HP of the Harasser is reduced by 300 HP and the AV weapons are removed. This makes it far more vulnerable to the ESBs and tanks. The Harasser also loses it's ES AV weapons. In exchange, the Skyguard is moved from the Lightning to the Harasser - I'll address the reasoning behind this later.

The Lightning: The HP of the Lightning is raised by 200 points and the Skyguard is removed. The HP buff is negligible, but it creates a "mid tier" HP for the ESBs to occupy.

The ESBs: The HP for the ESBs are set at 2800. This is 300 HP more than the original Harasser HP, giving it slightly more durability than the current Harasser. It's armor resist type is the same as the Harasser (light vehicle armor). This gives it the same vulnerability to light arms fire that the Harasser has, but still equips it as the "Anti-Vehicle Buggy". It's given the the Halberd and the ES AV weapons, also with the Bulldog and Walker. The Basilisk is the default weapon.

The Skyguard: To me, this is something that should have been done from the beginning, or at least done when the Harasser was first introduced. The Skyguard is PS1 was its own vehicle, and it was a light two man buggy. This takes the Skyguard back to its root. I envision the Skyguard version of the Harasser as adding a cover over the rumble seat converting the Harasser a two person vehicle. The nature of the Skyguard demands a two-person vehicle - one to drive and one to watch the sky. Additionally, the Harasser has the speed, maneuverability, and hill-climbing ability to really make a viable Anti-air ground vehicle.

Final thoughts: I get it - this is a HUGE change. It's going to shake up a LOT of people's play-styles. Personally, I don't like this idea because I drive the skyguard a LOT and it'll really hurt my play style because I like to grab my solo skyguard and just tag along with an armor column. Now I'll have to find a buddy who wants to drive or shoot. I know a lot of Harasser drivers are going to scream about the Harasser nerfs, but I ask you to look at it as not "losing a light buggy" but "gaining a heavy buggy" and think of the potential of what can be done with ESBs.

Ok, send all of your hate mail to "President Obama @ 1600 Pennsylvania Ave".

you want to nerf the Harrassers health to improve it's AI role? what? you have more of that stuff?
the biggest threat you face while in a harrasser is Infantry shoting at you with small arms and rocketlaunchers, vehicles are mostly a non issue because you can avoid them, Infantry can hide, sneak up and reduce you to 50% health in a moments notice.
why don't we reduce the harrassers health so far that you can OHK it with a beamer, that sure will improve it's AI role

like really....

It's less about "improving it's AI role" than it is "pushing it away from the AV role". I'd argue that in it's current state, it's "balanced" against the Lightning and OP against infantry. There are plenty of videos of the thing blasting through crowds of infantry with impunity. As an AI vehicle - there needs to be a risk / reward balance. Yes, the armor is weaker, but I currently see a lot of Harasser teams having no hesitation about stopping and hosing infantry and then driving away when they begin to take damage. The nerf I'm talking about wouldn't actually stop that, but it would make it more dangerous.

If infantry are "sneaking up on you", then I'd say you need to keep moving.

Harassers are squishy. No need to make them even more glass-like. I'm not sure you realise just how paper they are right now...

And lightings? They're fine the way they are. In no way do they need an HP buff.

I would be content if they just gave the harasser different models for each faction and kept everything else as is. Same stats, same weapons, just a different model. We have way too many NS vehicles in the game as is. Then do the same with the rest of the vehicles. Start with the liberator and the sunderer.

No skyguards more Air spam...

I like the Skyguard just where it is now... absolutely no need to nerf or bufff or change anything with it...

I don't really agree with your ideas for a Lightning buff and a Harasser nerf, considering the two vehicle's relative crew requirements.

I do like the idea of tough ESBs though, wheeled vehicles seem to work better in rugged terrain, and having an "Amerish tank" seems neat. It might be simpler/better to just make tracked vehicles less awful to drive, though.

I can not tell you how many times I get recked in a harraser by just a handful of heavies. Small arms resistance isnt even near what it should be. No need to make room. Just offer different playstyle. ESB is rough terrain light tactical vehicle (like a humvee) the harraser can remain a light fast attack and transport (dune buggy) I say all that needs to really be done is increase handling of all vehicles and make harrasers a bit faster (110kph default) so there is a speed benefit to an esb(~85kph) give esb better turning.

If ESBs never make it into the game, you're right. Harassers and Lightnings are fine where they sit NOW. But the whole point of the topic is "Making room for the ESBs".

In a world where the ARE ESBs, it makes perfect sense to push the light buggy down closer to the Flash, and push the light tank up closer to the MBTs.

Right now, Harassers and Lightnings are pretty evenly matched and that's fine because there is no "middle option". When a "middle option" is in play, if no changes are made, then all three become redundant. The point here is to space their roles out so that each has a niche. To avoid "The Valkyrie Effect."

Also, it's better to get a discussion out in front of the roll-out while changes can still be made.

Here's my reasoning:

1. Harassers were historically a light buggy focused on anti-infantry.
2. If they're going to assume that role again, then they should be balanced towards that - that means "even squishier than they are now".
3. Conversely, the light tank will need to be more durable than the heavy buggy so that it can be competitive against the ESBs.
4. The ESBs represent an opportunity to better define roles between these three platforms.

What a debacle that would be. Put on your Game Developer hat for a second. You, as a game developer, would spend money on creating brand new assets - doing 3 times the work - to simply replace an asset that is already in the game?

Not to mention, what happens to all those cosmetics people purchased for the Harasser (and the Liberator and Sunderer)? How are you going to handle that?

Are you going to issue blanket refunds? Well, now you spent a lot of money on assets only to have those assets cost you even more money in refunds. That's some heavy negative cash flow and you can bet the bosses aren't going to like that.

Are you going to tell all of your customers that paid for those customizations "Too bad, so sad"? You're going to alienate a LOT of players and lose a lot of future business in one big face-plant.

Are you going to grant those customizations on the new models? So now you've spent the money on making new assets, and instead of them generating more money, you have to rebuild all of the customizations that you had already done for the Harasser and give those away for free to the people most likely to buy them in the first place.

That's really all your options, none of them good.

OR, you can add a whole new vehicle type, which adds content to the game and gives you a platform on which to base new cosmetic purchases. It's kind of a no-brainer from the dev stand-point.

That's not true. Two of the biggest problems right now with the skyguard are their limited mobility and the difficulty in driving and shooting at air targets simultaneously. Putting the skyguard on the Harasser frame solves those problems. It would allow Skyguards to chase down aircraft instead of passively picking at them as they fly over. I think you'd actually hear quite an outcry from the Pilot community as they realized they were being hunted from the ground and were struggling to escape.

Frankly, I do too. You know, I use the Skyguard as my go-to vehicle when I want to travel across continents. It gives me protection during the trip and allows me to engage air when I get there. And I don't need anyone else.

But, like I told Villanuk, it has some severe limitations. Limitations the original PS1 Skyguard never had. Making it a two man vehicle really turns it into a predator instead of a passive observer waiting and hoping for ESFs to wander too close.

At some point you have to divorce yourself from your personal wants and think about what is best for the game.

"Crew requirements" is a bit of a misnomer. I've seen plenty of solo harassers racking up kills. And a two man harasser is almost as good as a three man. In fact, harassers usually lose their third man pretty quick anyways. The third seat is more of a bonus than a necessity.

While I would like a handling pass on the lightning, the ESBs are on their way. Now, they aren't guaranteed yet, but I think it's a safe bet at this point. And yes, I think they will be very cool.

I appreciate the responses. I ask only that you guys look at the bigger picture. Do we really want the devs to just dump these things willy-nilly into the game without really working them into an overall schema?

"You can't just dump stuff on it! It's NOT a big truck! It's a series of tubes!" - Sen. Ted Stevens

What's an ESB?

What the **** is an ESB? 0.0

Oh yea, I guess I should have said, huh?

"Empire Specific Buggies"






Sorry, couldn't find the VS concept art.

OH FK YES. I remember these little pains in the behinds. These are excellent changes, why would anyone hate them?

Well, really I don't think anyone would.

But if you could drive one of these, and it

A) Carried more people
B) Had the same weapons
C) Was tougher
D) Went almost as fast

Who would ever pull a Harasser ever again?

Which is the the whole point of this topic: To hammer out what the community wants to see these become. Higby has already said that these are on the project board, and I would suspect they'll be coming down the pipe in the first quarter of next year.

That makes NOW a good time to start talking about them - before they are put into production and while they are still being hammered out.

I don't mind the Skyguard Idea but the PS1 Skyguard was LETHAL to Air and that's why it was a 2 man vehicle.

Well, the current skyguard is still rather lethal to ESFs as it is now.

Imagine if they had someone else driving around obstacles, and had the speed of the Harasser. That would keep the ESFs in reach much longer. It might end up needing a nerf to the power of the skyguard flak if it works as well as I imagine it would.

Pilots that currently do a quick landing behind a hill and do repairs would find a harasser hot on their heels before they could get back up off the ground.

We have a Harrasser already, and people complain that's OP and that one faction's infantry farming spam weapon is better at farming infantry than their faction's infantry farming spam weapon

(plus the Vanu don't need anything else that can strafe)

Well, considering they are ES with their own traits and properties, it is a GOOD thing to have them in the game. No more NS vehicles, their time is over on Auraxis. I wonder what the devs will come up with next; ES Lightnings? If so, AROUSING

While I agree that the third man in the Harasser is irrelevant, the difference between a 1 and 2 man Harasser is pretty big. The former is a semi-mobile turret, limited to long range weaponry (and the PPA is getting nerfed.)

Perhaps the point I am really trying to make is that the Harasser takes more work to get running effectively than the Lightning, and you're trying to make the reward for that smaller than it currently is, and significantly smaller than it currently is compared to the Lightning. In your vision of these three ground vehicles, what is the point of getting two people to pull a Harasser when you could just pull a Lightning (or two)/ESB/Flash (or two)?

One last thought is that the Lightning, being a solo vehicle, really doesn't need buffs -- it's ease of use (one man crew) is rewarding enough. Buffing it just discourages teamwork.