Tank Balance

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

  1. Kraxist

    Ok, I'm willing to try this for ****'s sake. Just to test this all out and really determine if I can adjust to a different playstyle.

    So I'm what, AP main gun, Mjolnir top gun, racer chassis, vehicle stealth, shield?

    I'd appreciate suggestions on optics. I'm guess reload speed is actually important in this strat? What do I do for mines, isn't there some sort of charger for that? Stay away from buildings...what else?

    I'm being serious. As someone who actually has an interest in playing my race, let's have it all. Full build me, and I'll see if I still like this flaming deathtrap.
  2. Stormsinger

    Both of these statements are correct to a degree - All MBTs should have a reasonable chance against one another 1v1. Due to current balance, they are not. The Prowler trumps all at high range and midrange - the Vanguard can trump things nicely at midrange, but has to rely on it's shield if many misses occur. The Magrider... isn't really designed to go toe to toe with either, so it sits in the category of 'Flanking hovertoilet'

    Tanks seem to be sitting in an odd place right now - the original design goal of a combined arms game was to give all empires similar AV / AI potential, but with strengths / weaknesses in differing areas. What we have now is a gamestate in which the devs have attempted to make platforms identical to one another, but with different weapon models / projectile graphics, designed to fulfill the same roles at the same ranges, all without taking into account the MBT design itself, or the rest of the empires' Infantry / MAX capability.

    That's not to say that tanks are in a bad state - overall map design and balance are just lopsided in such a way that 96v96 fights negate individual vehicle potency in favor of sheer numbers - Any MBT will blow if hit by 20 simultaneous shells - the TR can just farm errant infantry wandering outside of base walls faster then anyone else, the VS can get from base to base en masse quickly with Magrider terrain traversal, and the NC keep armor up the longest in general due to vanguard shields and general CQB potency.

    And now, more rambling.

    To me, a practical scenario to define what I consider to be 'combined arms' would be Galaxy dropping on a point that's otherwise guarded by an armor zerg, or flanking with a stealth Sunderer to deploy an infantry / max AV nest in a strategic position. Individual strengths / weaknesses are much less important than the power granted by the ability to be in a good position faster then the other guy with as many numbers as possible.

    Conversely, consider a scenario in which a well defended sunderer is pouring infantry onto a point, rendering defenders trapped in their spawn room. Now consider that a single player thinks to flank that sunderer with an MBT, and manages to do so. What MBT would you want in order to capitalize on the element of surprise?
    Personally, I want one with the highest offensive potential: The prowler. This last example is the one that pops up most often for me - an individual can make a major difference in a combined arms armor / air / infantry encounter in such a scenario, and 1v1 brawling, positional, or pure DPS out potential are all vital. Without a major advantage (Or... at least roughly balanced capability) that can be utilized somewhere in this scenario, one or more empires may be left out of being able to affect fights in such a way.

    Anyway, just a few thoughts.
    • Up x 1
  3. JohnGalt36

    I get your point and your frustration. Personally, I roll with a 2x zoomHalberd for versatility's sake. If you get the drop on somebody at close range, they die regardless of your AV secondary. Halberd or Enforcer gives you a little bit of all-range versatility. Mjolnir is really good up close, though. I run thermals on it.
  4. Kraxist

    I really appreciated this post. You've eloquently stated the points that my mind was wandering around.

    I feel that a prowler or magrider can do just as well in CQC with a sneak attack as a vanguard. So the Vanguard has a shield? Does that mean in can only excel in that one role? And if so, how do we mitigate that this "Defined Role" has to deal with things like mines, rockets, and C-4 more often than the other tanks if they do stick to their "Defined Roles".

    I mean I can't get mine guard if I'm pigeonholed into vehicle stealth just to stay viable. See what I'm saying?

    So really? Do we need to start getting into Passive systems for the tanks? This has always been an unused slot in the game, and intentionally placed there for possible future use. I mean, it's there! Is it time we start using it? Using it for things like Vehicle stealth, or secondary armors like mineguards or maybe sandbags on top for c-4 mitigation? And I'm not just saying this should only be for Vanguards, I mean this for all of the MBTs.
  5. Taemien

    All three tanks can kill sundies in short order.
    All three tanks can kill each other in short order.
    All three tanks can kill infantry in short order.
    All three tanks can get gibbed by infantry in short order.

    There's balance. There really is between all three. The frustrating part is what the fuq can a MBT actually do?

    Why do you all spend 450 nanites on them? What makes you runt to a tank terminal to pull a MBT. What makes you want to redeploy hop 2-3 bases back to get to a terminal to pull one? What makes you want to struggle for hours on Esamir to make sure you can pull your MBT anywhere?

    To kill sunderers.
    To kill other MBTs trying to kill your sunderers.

    That's it. Sure you can kill infantry with a MBT. Even Spawn Suppress. But a Lightning is SO SO much better at this.. right out of the box with no nanites spent. And I have to ask this.. is it even worth a MBT to take out a Sundy? Wouldn't a AP Lightning do the trick just as well, and maybe a bit quicker to engage? Maybe with a Gunner you can protect yourself better from counter attack.

    That's got to be frustrating to say the least.

    And that's the real problem. Always has. OP says it was different early on. No it wasn't. Well.. a bit different. The tank rounds across the board had splash. I think AP had 2m, HEAT 4m, and HE had 6m. This allowed tanks to crush infantry as a force multiplier. But since there can be as many tanks as infantry, they curbed it. Sorry but that's a necessary evil when manpower is a resource in itself. Especially with lower pop numbers.

    The alternative is limiting how many vehicles each faction has up. Sounds good on paper, till an outfit goes to do a push on the east side of the map and finds the empire is taxed out because cert farming solo players pulled all the tanks. It sucked in Tribes, it will suck worse here.

    No.. the fix is to give the Vehicles more to do. Allow them to attack bases directly. Not just the new ones coming out made by players. But the existing ones too. Allow certain bridges, ledges, walls, ceilings, floors, and tunnels to be attacked and damage/destroyed. Make them resistant to infantry based explosives and cause them to effectively need vehicles to be attacked.

    When destroyed it allows easier access by the attackers (walls, ceilings, and floors), or slower access from defenders (tunnels, bridges, and ledges.. as well as walls, ceilings, and such exposing them to fire down certain cooridors). This way vehicles can move alongside infantry to support them. And really support them this time.

    With more vehicles attacking bases, the best way to engage a vehicle is another vehicle in most cases so defenders will likely bring more vehicles to counter, causing more vehicle on vehicle skirmishes to boot.

    Now vehicles are shooting at more vehicles, when they're not their shooting at buildings and structures instead. That means less time spawn suppressing (known as spawn camping). Which means infantry are happy as well. And it makes for more dynamic fights as well.

    Buffing, nerfing.. none of that is needed. Vehicles are fine. Infantry is fine. Vehicles just need more to do. Vehicle drivers/pilots just need not to be bored.
  6. Reclaimer77

    Destroyable scenery would require a brand new game engine, millions of dollars in man hours to implement, and probably 2 years to make it to the live servers. Not to mention every base would need to be re-designed to compensate for this.

    Translation: What are you smoking?
  7. oberchingus

    Wow this is a big tank discussion thread, filled with stats and reports and oooodles of data I never care about, cause on the field, it's not academic, it is what it is. A bloody tank fight interrupted by air, lockons, non-rendering AT mines, debris OP and CTDs!

    So really - the TL:DR is the GK is annoying to fight in wide open spaces where cover isn't abundant....Righto! Welcome to Planetside! Now learn to tank, learn to engage opponents on your terms and learn to win!

    Yeah, EliteEskimo doesn't come around anymore because of that topic. I miss that guy. Whatever happened to him I wonder.
  8. Swordsbane

    Since I've been playing for a couple years now and my group usually pulls Vanguards, I figured I'd weigh in on this.

    My Van (not my squadmates) is usually Titan-120 with either a Mo-Jo or a Walker up top, racer speed or fast backup/turn depending on terrain, shield and nanite repair. We pick the terrain to use our tanks and when we do, we deploy in force... hardly ever single tanks and rarely do we duel at close range.

    Most of the tanks we're up against don't have the gatekeeper, but we know enough to double-team anyone who shows up with one. Our effective engagement range is medium and we use the terrain when we can.

    I personally like the Vanguard. The Magrider has a higher learning curve to use effectively and it's lack of turret is a hindrance, not a help. It's side-slip is a problem, but only for those who aren't ready for it. The Prowler is a problem usually only when it catches you by surprise, or you see more than one and they are deployed. When that happens, they get vicious... but like the magrider, they are vulnerable if you know what you're doing.

    I don't think the Vanguard is at a disadvantage in one-on-one duels either, unless you have a problem maneuvering in and around obstacles when your turret is not facing front... in which case, you're no better than a magrider.... except that you can't side-slip :)

    As for weapons, I think ALL the MBTs need more options for a main gun... Just having variants of a basic cannon is pretty boring. I would enjoy not being able to tell what the Prowler I'm up against is armed with, and I would enjoy surprising my enemies the same way.

    ALL the MBTs have advantages and disadvantages. If you are locked into playing a Vanguard a way that doesn't play to it's strengths and allows for it's weaknesses, I can see how that may look like it sucks. And when the devs change things enough so that the tactics you are familiar and comfortable with no longer work as well as they did, I can see how that would be frustrating.

    On the other hand, suck it up. You get rolled a lot... change what you're doing. Give up the Van or use it properly.

    As for being bored.... I'm a Van driver and I can tell you... that hardly EVER happens, and when it does... it's not the vehicles problem.
  9. EliteEskimo

    As someone who has a fair bit of experience in the Vanguard, play peekabo with a GK Prowler and they lose. They aren't going to fit 40 shots in between you popping in and out of cover. That being said if there is one several hundred meters away and your aim isn't good enough to trade shots at range, try to find a way to move up until you're in a comfortable range or if not try to flank even if it requires an off the beaten path detour. The GK only does chip damage, and the Prowler maingun will have a much harder time hitting you if you make your movement varied meaning you can move up if you don't drive in a straight line.

    On a side note, I remember the great c4 debate wars, started at least one and participated in many myself. Unfortunately LA/infatryside tears will always out power basic logic and sound/solid arguments.. No one will ever convince me that a flying/hovering infantry should be able to take 80% of MBT's health away with a single brick of C4. Speaking of infantry, I know some hooligans on here a long time ago said that I can't have a proper perspective because I had almost no c4 kills and only a single infantry Auraxium. Well truth be told, after 10 infantry weapon auraxiums and a couple hundred C4 kills under my belt I can firmly say that C4 is and always has been OP on Light Assault in its current form.
    • Up x 1
  10. Taemien

    No one is talking about leveling mountains or trees.

    We're talking about static things that wouldn't affect performance more than a turret does (in fact less since walls don't move). And sorry to say.. but Forgelight does support destructible scenery. It does this in Landmark where personal weapons do in fact cause holes (sometimes bigger than the mining picks do). But that's irrelevant due to being restricted to structures. Also.. this:

    An unrealistic example of what the engine is capable of. 29FPS and there's thousands of structures on the screen at a time. Make sure you do your research before making dismissive statements.

    2 years.. LOL... its already on the test server.
  11. Hegeteus

    Mjolnir's primary purpose is to get you to Valhalla
    • Up x 2
  12. oberchingus

    It's pronounced: Meow-Meow.
    • Up x 2
  13. Jake the Dog

    I REAALLY hope they dont let that happen ingame though. Spamming structures to the point of crashing potatoes is bad. Then again I have no idea how the whole Ant thing works anyways. I'm just a lowly tanker.
  14. Reclaimer77

    A few hundred C-4 kills. But you have THOUSANDS of kills in your tank.

    Clearly you can stand up here and say C-4 is OP....

    You tried to get the weakest class in the game nerfed, and lost the argument. Cry more. You aren't getting your wish. Tank armor will not get buffed, and C-4 will not get nerfed.
  15. Taemien

    It was a stress test to see what it would do. You'd never see that many structures ingame.
  16. Wisdomcube2

    The vanguard is by far the strongest tank in the game in the hands of a good player. These aren't the best clips but this what a montage I already had showing some gameplay.
  17. Jake the Dog

    All the tanks are the strongest tank in the game in the hands of a good player.
    • Up x 1
  18. Hegeteus

    As it stands now, the people you're addressing lack the tank perspective entirely so I wouldn't fret on your perspective if I was you. I recommend that you just leave the subject because trust me, you will not get a proper balance debate(as you can probably guess by now) no matter if your points are valid or not. Not here anyway

    I'm not taking a stance on it, but I've never seen any balance subject met with so much bias and hostility
    • Up x 2
  19. Jake the Dog

    Who said LA was the weakest class in the game??? I love playing LA for infantry stuff, grab a smg/shotgun/serpent/Lynx/GD7f and go where the enemy doesn't want you.

    Is it crazy to have mineguard cover C4 as well? I really doubt it personally. I don't think that the big tankers will run mineguard anyways. But I believe it should cover C4 as well because its kind of a safety net for new players. If your intention is to farm crappy tankers thats pretty low. Its different if you're trying to knock out a good tanker. But sitting in an area instagibbing the crappy guys is borderline unethical :/
    • Up x 2
  20. Wisdomcube2

    Highly disagree. I would love to the Prowler receive a slight armor buff. 5% or something small.