Tank Balance

Discussion in 'PlanetSide 2 Gameplay Discussion' started by Kraxist, Feb 8, 2016.

  1. Kraxist

    Once upon a time, this game used to have some friggin balance with its MBTs. After playing in the current state for months and months, I've decided to make my first post ever on this site and really rip one out.

    The Vanguard has been absolutely gutted. In my mind, there is no longer any question that it's so far behind the other tanks at this point. I remember days when my buddy and I would take the Titan AP + Enforcer combo and with expert tactics we could stay alive for an hour. Now, we can barely keep a tank alive for the 9 minutes it takes to refill the meter. And it's effing bullcrap. I can point to exactly the motherfriggin issue.

    The last major release of vehicle weapons totally threw off the balance in this game. Do you guys even remember how every damn TR prowler or harass had a dang Vulcan on it? It was constant. No other weapon in the game was so awesomely general use. It could damage everything and be good at it. BRRRppBRRRpppBRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR was a constant background noise on any battlefield. And as friggin annoyingly OP as that weapon was...firing on everything from people, to tanks, to airplanes...I really miss those days. Think of how massively ridiculous the gatekeeper has to be in order to have usurped the Vulcan. I rarely ever even see a Vulcan anymore. And I'll tell you why, the gatekeeper is too damn good at its job. Its damage is fantastic, its rate of fire is awesome, its range is incredible...but the best part is, and I bet over half of the TR who would fanatically defend this weapon don't even realize this...is the constant blocking of vision that it produces on the victim. Yeah guys, I don't know if you know this...but when you hit someone with that thing, it completely destroys their vision with constant red flashes, followed by a facial explosion, rinse and repeat. I can't even fire back effectively because I can't friggin follow your movement in between the strobe like fashion of getting red light flashy thinged in my face, and at night this effect is compounded 10x. Honestly, keep your damage, keep your range. But FFS this concussion grenade like effect on these shots is goddamn ridiculous....and that's just point of fact. This needs to be fixed before we can even remotely talk about bringing balance back into this game.

    Don't even get me started on how VS got the Aphelion, which is basically their version of a Vulcan. That's cool too. That's fine. You know what...it's actually nice to see the Magrider be able to boost into a battle, flank me properly, and use its mobility in a combat enhancement. So really, I'm actually happy for the VS that they have such a good weapon.

    So really, my secondary complaint is that the Mjolnir brought absolutely nothing to the Vanguard while the other MBTs got really cool stuff that really enhanced their strategies. Prowler gets to post up and lock in with awesomely long range now. Magriders get to gap close and really flank and pincer effectively. And Vanguards get to...get frigging blown up. I mean there is no area where it effectively competes anymore. The Enforcer's shot travel time is aweful in long distance, especially against a moving target...and the Vanguard's slow movement makes the Mjolnir CQC strategy basically suicide.

    I think the answer here is a more suitable class weapon for the NC. Something like a Railgun, a high damage, super slow reloading, high bullet speed, no fall off weapon that could be useful both long range and CQC. The inherent flaw of this weapon should be just like the Titan AP weapon: whiffing your shot leaves you severely, severely disadvantaged. This is the type of weapon system that SHOULD have been introduced. The one that gives a good option for taking something OTHER THAN THE ENFORCER, while keeping the enforcer as a decent mid-range option due to its clip size.

    TLDR: The Gatekeeper's "concussive" effect of its shots is stupidly op, and the Vanguard needs some sort of comparable weapons system in order to remain competitive.
    • Up x 1
  2. JohnGalt36

    The Vanguard is a CQC tank, though. It's most effective when flanking and getting up close to other tanks, where lockdown and strafing are both negated by the close range.

    I used to think the Mjolnir was terrible, but my friend gunned for me a bit the other day with it and it was really effective. It just melts sundies and tanks up close.

    I do think Vanguards need a bit of adjusting, as they are the worst performing tank in almost every category, but I also think that most people don't play to the strengths of the Vanguard, so it feels more underpowered than it actually is.
  3. Poppington

    I only have enough certs in my Prowler to really say anything about this, but I can say that as a Prowler user, the most terrifying thing on the battlefield is a Maxed Stealth, Maxed Racer Vanguard.

    JohnGalt is right though, the vanguard is strongest at a close range. Luckily, since the bases are so close on most continents, this is easy to get into. Just stay away from north Indar - the hellscape of tank zergs.
  4. Kraxist

    And I'm just curious, what would you say those strengths are? As someone who has invested massive certs into the full shield and rival chassis (a strategy that worked extremely well for a long time), what are my combat strengths? How should I readjust. Morever, as a slow CQC tank, how do I mitigate the effects of constant threat from C-4 and rockets? I feel like using the Vanguard in this manner is truly haphazard, but I'm interested in serious strategy suggestions.
  5. Stormsinger

    While I don't have time to respond to this in full right now, I will say that I agree with some of your points, although...

    You just described precisely what the original Saron was for the VS, it was changed extremely swiftly due to how OP it was. We will not be seeing it's like again.

    As far as tank secondaries are concerned, take a look at current stats. Mjolnir isn't really used enough to give us a more accurate performance metric, but from the low average battlerank, and the high Avg V KPH, we can see that it is highly effective even in inexperienced hands. The Vanguard excels at close range brawling, and the Mjolnir excels in obliterating vehicles. It just sucks at infantry, which is the way it should be (AV should not excel at AI - in this regard, I think the Saron / Aphelion / Gatekeeper / Vulcan should be reduced in AI potential, and buff all AI secondaries to roughly the same level of performance.) The Saron and Enforcer are performing roughly on par with one another.

    (Sorted by V-KPH)

    The Gatekeeper has relatively low performance stats, although I attribute this to the sheer insane potency of Prowler primaries. Gatekeepers soften things up, P2-120 collects the kills. On release weekend, I collected 15,000 certs soloing with my Gatekeeper in my Harasser / Prowler. More recently, the Gatekeeper was nerfed into something less insanely overpowering - it has felt fairer to use, and less unbeatable to face (Personally, I think the Gatekeeper should be the least potent of the long range AV weapons due to the uncontested superiority of the Prowler primary lineup, but eh. I am happy where it is now on both the Prowler and the Harasser, and this is speaking as a Br100+ of all three factions.)

    (Sorted by V-KPH for fairness to the above.)

    Really, I like the state of all three MBTs right now in general, save for the PPA. It's as underpowered now as it was overpowered before - Still, the Kobalt is a viable option, but I would really like an ES option that isn't worse then an unupgraded, stock basilisk in every regard.
    • Up x 1
  6. Poppington

    Start with getting Racer chassis and stealth (Stealth has to be maxed). Racer mitigates your speed quite nicely, and stealth makes flanking an actual posibility. Your shield is basically a giant **** you to C4, so make sure to use third person a lot except when actively shooting - if you pop it during explosion, you live. In my (admittedly very uncerted) vanguard, I actually switch to third person between every shot.

    Of course, the usual things about CQC tanking as well. Stay away from buildings, keep moving unless you have a very good position, always give them your front, don't fire until you know you've got a good engagement, etc.
    • Up x 1
  7. JohnGalt36

    Full stealth, racer, and shield. Flank wide and get behind other tanks. Profit.

    I will hold off on commenting on the C4 thing. That horse has been beaten.
    • Up x 1
  8. Chambo

    Ha! I saw this and immediately thought, thank god people notice how terrible the Vanguard is. Let's just boil it down to this simple issue: Secondary Weapons.

    The NC Mjolnir is so CQC that you're forced into small areas for effective use. Tank combat is NOT CQC. When it gets up close and personal - HA's, LA's, and Engineers have the tools necessary to rip armor out of the equation. So in most places around Indar, Amerish, and Esamir, long lasting tanks will perch behind the infantry and siege away. It's not efficient for the typical NC player to pull a Vanguard with the Mjolnir and shove it into an amp station just to suicide v1 tank. Most NC Vanguards don't even use it. The Halberd is better..... yes, most of us use this generic weapon... Our secondary's shoot incredibly slow or have frustratingly tiny ranges when encountering other MBT's. (Why do we get a lobbing weapon??? !!!!(R)!(#@$)(!*@#DAOSIFDUASDLU!)

    The Gatekeeper... Otherwise known as the !#@*$&!@(*!&@$!~@#)%(*@&#%)(*!@#$, cannon. Perched vanguards plink away at anything. Tanks + Infantry = juicy targets. If its a 1 person on 1 person matchup, the Vanguard does great! However, with active secondary's, just hide and shoot when possible. It throws so much additional damage down range at such a ludicrous pace. When coupled with main cannons it's plain ridiculous. (Plus it has awesome Indirect Damage...!!!) I know this quibbling won't spur any changes but holy hell, your kill screen will show a Gatekeeper on it all day long, unlike any NC secondary. If that's not indicative of something overpowered than I don't know what is. NC has adapted and its not the end of the world, it just sucks to deal with. If anything, a dmg or firing speed nerf would be kind to the smoldering freedom front.

    The Aphelion - more or less fine. Magazine size is stupid but otherwise its not a wreck all machine because they have to get in close to use it. Which is a risky move for ALL tanks across the board.
  9. FateJH

    That's exactly what the TR said about the Vulcan on a Prowler - though in discussion of having little range on their secondary - and they were told "but the Halberd exists."
    Just keep making the bad joke that the Prowler is a fixed artillery piece and eventually reality and humor will align with one another.

    Also, don't comapre the Gatekeeper to the Mjolnir or the Aphelion. You may not be; but, they were all in the same post as if they were. Compare the CQC weapons - Vulcan for the TR, Mjolnir for the NC, Aphelion for the VS - to each other and the ranegd weapons - Gatekeeper for the TR, Enforcer for the NC, Saron for the VS - to each other. Each group taken separately.
  10. Stormsinger

    The Vulcan / Aphelion are what the Mjolnir is intended to compete with - the Vanguard is the CQB brawler tank - it has the highest natural armor (in general), and the vanguard shield is the only really effective "Oh crap" button on MBTs. See the stats I posted further up for more detail on the Mjolnir - but it is really a very seriously underrated weapon. it needs more projectile velocity (Specifically, +50m/s to match the Aphelion / Vulcan), but other then that - you can't really beat it for point blank vehicle obliteration speed - sunderers especially. (See the PS2 wiki resistance tables, it nukes them quite fast.)

    Yep - the gatekeeper is potent as heck, although the recent nerf made it less impossible to face. Personally, I believe that TR already has the best armor in the game, the Gatekeeper existing is just over the top. The TR has been short of long range AV power everywhere except for vehicles - the Prowler is already obscenely powerful, it did not need a long range AV weapon - the halberd filled this role nicely. What the TR needed, and still needs is man-portable long range AV, something that can compete with the Lancer / Phoenix as it's RL.

    A guidance system similar to the Engineer AV turret / Raven would have been nice for the Striker - the code for the mechanics is already in place and functional, so the change would have been minimal effort. Meh. I'm ok with the Gatekeeper as-is, the recent nerf helped bring it in line, but i'm still annoyed by the design decision to put it in in the first place. Prowlers / Vulcan harassers already topped the charts - it's long-range AV maxes / infantry could still use help.
  11. JohnGalt36

    You have to take the ES abilities in to consideration when talking about tank v tank combat.

    Prowler - Lockdown plus the GK means you shouldn't ever try to play the long-medium range trading shots game with them. They will out-DPS you and the Vanguard is too slow to dodge incoming fire at the speed and frequency of a 2-barrel cannon plus GK in lockdown. The only way you win is by sneaking up on them, dropkicking them in the rear armor, and popping shield when they turn around.

    Magrider - Magburn and strafing means that you also will not likely win a medium-long range back-and-forth battle with them. The Vanguard is too slow, even with the mags projectile velocity, and the mag will just strafe until he kills you or he turbos away from you. Once again, the way to beat them is by sneaking up on their rear armor and popping the shield if they can even turn around before they die.

    Don't try to play your weakness against the other tanks' strengths.
  12. Chambo

    Great points, those are just the newest weapons correct? Would you agree that the Vulcan>Mjolner and Gatekeeper>Enforcer?
  13. Poppington

    Vulcan>Mjolner On a harasser, yes. On an MBT, not really.

    Gatekeeper>Enforcer. On an MBT yes, on a harasser, not really.

    Asymmetrical balance. Hurrah.
  14. Kraxist

    See this is where I agree with you 100% Even the "apples and oranges" argument still doesn't pan out because the weapons still aren't in balance. It's one thing to say "oh it melts a Sundy". Everything melts a Sundy. I wanna know the raw potential in tank v tank combat, where....most of the time, it begins with two opposing armies squaring off against each other in siege like fashion...and the vanguard gets pulverized.

    I'm just not buying the CQC argument here fellas, it's too situational and assumes that every position can be snuck up on and flanked. I'm talking real, actual battle here where each side is fighting 96+ and my tanks are getting crushed by people riding on better **** and cackling while screaming WHERE IS YOUR GOD NOW NC??? WHERE???
  15. JohnGalt36

    It's asymmetric balance. The tanks aren't meant to have the same strengths and weaknesses. It's nobody's fault but your own if you try to out-prowler a prowler. All the suggestions here have been solid. Play the CQC tank like a CQC tank. I mean, you could always switch to TR if you want to use the Prowler.
  16. Reclaimer77

    More Vehicleside double standard mindset:

    Vehicle shi*ter on tanks vs everything else:
    "Planetside isn't a 1v1 game. Use combined arms!"

    Same vehicle shi*ter on MBT balance:
    "My tank needs to be equal to their tanks in 1v1 fights. Also our secondary weapons need to be equal to theirs! RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE!!!"
  17. Poppington

    There's the issue. Right there.

    In my experience, those are typically just zerg stalemates. Yeah they might take one base every now and then, but how many times have we seen the rubber band of Indar Ex/Quartz Ridge or Mao/Howling Pass? In those fights, when everything blows up within 3 seconds of becoming visible, tank balance actually means very little. The only thing that matters there is numbers.

    Your problem that you consider those zergs to be fights, when in fact they are just farms.
    • Up x 1
  18. Kraxist

    No, and I get that. But it does piss me off that I've spend good money on this game back when the Vanguard COULD perform adequately as a long distance fighter and now can't. It does piss me off that I've spent so much time leveling a tank and an engineer for a race only to have to redo it all over again just because the way I want to play got way friggin nerfed. It does piss me off that each tank can't be specced out to at least be remotely comparable in other roles. You're right, highly specialized roles have been developed...but it wasn't always the case. You didn't always get so pigeon-holed into a role, and these racial differences weren't so obscenely blatant back in the day when you chose your race like you were choosing a friggin starter pokemon. And lastly, I think what pisses me off the most is that I've spent well more than I probably should have money-wise supporting this game...and how frustrated I've become as a result of it.
    • Up x 1
  19. Poppington

    But the vanguard can perform adequately at range. Always has.
    The Prowler just excels at range. Always has.
  20. ColonelChingles

    Because in the first case you're comparing tanks to other things. In the second case you're comparing tanks to equivalent tanks.

    For example, it'd be like comparing Medics and Heavy Assaults.

    If you compare Medics to HAs, most people will say that in a head-up fight the HA should win. Because the Medic is not supposed to be as good at combat as the HA is. If the Medic wants to beat that HA, it is perfectly reasonable that the Medic change classes or bring along a friend who is good at taking out HAs.

    That's like comparing tanks to infantry. Tanks should squash infantry, because tanks are supposed to be far superior to any number of infantry. Tanks and infantry are not the same thing, so asking for tanks to be able to pummel infantry to dust is perfectly reasonable. And if infantry want to beat tanks, then they should bring their own air/armour assets, just like how the Medic will need friends to kill that HA. That's fine.

    But if you compare an NC Medic to a VS Medic, then most people will say that it should be an even fight. Medics on any faction serve the same role, so they ought to be equally combat effective. A TR Medic should not have an absolute advantage over a VS Medic or NC Medic.

    That's like comparing tanks to tanks. An NC MBT should be equal to a TR MBT or a VS MBT. Because they're all MBTs. Sure they might have slightly different playstyles (just as how NC ARs have slightly different playstyles than TR ARs), but at the end of the day they should probably be equal based on game metrics.

    So if you had a modicum of logic, you'd see that there actually isn't any problem with saying that tanks should slaughter infantry but tanks should be balanced to other tanks.

    • Up x 3