Upcoming Tank and Liberator Changes

Fact of the matter is it takes 31 seconds at POINT BLANK RANGE to kill a STOCK lib with a skyguard. This significantly increases with distance and significantly increases against comp armour. You talk clips to avoid talking time to kill which is the real meat and bones of the issue and if something is over powered.

35+ seconds for Walker ttk against stock lib at PBR

45+ seconds for ranger ttk against stock lib at PBR

It takes a Tank buster 6 seconds to drop a Lightening and less then 10 to drop a MBT. Everything else dies instantly.

That's the very definition of over powered. ^^^^^^

Anyone quitting or complaining about lib nerfs were holding onto a crutch where they could kill anything 5 times faster then it could ever kill it. Crutch gameplay because of the silly lib buffs and the best anti-tank gun in the game being mounted on a aircrafts pilot seat. Nice that the devs FINALLY notice libs using anti-tank weapons as multi use weapons to kill everything while everyone else has to specialise to even think of hitting a lib or any aircraft.

sound good, so i will assume it cant be true.
by the way shredder is very efficient against maxes. more resistance pls

* THIS is what I was talking about! This is not bad ! Its good! We are defining roles here!

Of course this puts Rocket Pods in a field where its primarily a peasant farming tool. Well, if its supposed to be that much of a suppressive weapon, then let it roll!

One issue I would like to address is: OK, Rocketpods nerf versus vehicles. But does that count ESFs and Libs? On that part, I don't think that is fair. Because Liberators can simply land and out-repair ESFs, and with a further reduction on the strongest weapon option on ESF (in terms of damage) that issue would be increased. I probably won't use as much Rocketpods after this, because it is not going to be the optimal anti-lib weapon with the damage further reduced (seeing that you miss easily more than 65% of the shots).

I think there should be a slight nosegun buff versus libs.

They are the optimal A2G option, and that is further emphasized by the ESF nerf (which is good!). Then ESFs should be further emphasized as Lib counters (when they really are) to compensate the A2G nerf and also compensate the consequence of doing less damage to Libs with Rocketpods.

First of all, I am glad that they heard our complaints and that they decided to look at the MBTS, however I am quite surprised of the approach they are adopting for this.
Anyway, I am curious to see what all those changes could do to the gameplay of the tanks....next I will have perhaps a more defined opinion.

My first thoughts:

• About the Magrider, I can tell that the velocity of the main guns is certainly the problem underlined by most of the MAG players.
  They dreamed about a slightly better velocity, they will see it perhaps even more decreased (perhaps it will force the average drivers to flank! who knows) The projectile velocities of the other MBTs were not a problem at all.

• The turret stabilization can be a great improvement, but if they do not give more freedom to the fixed canon of the Magrider, I do not see how we could use the rough terrains to our advantage anymore. This is a matter of balance here to think about because the rough terrains are the only places where the Magrider may have an advantage.
  This stabilization change will make the gameplay smoother for the others, which is a good fact at least.

• A better reverse speed means more survavibility which is a good thing to take! The racer chassis will be far more interesting than the Rival chassis then, so this last one will need a boost (no nerf to Racer!)
  Furthermore, we will perhaps see less infantry players running straight after us with C4, those are some quite comical situations.

• Reducing the effectiveness of the MBTs at long range and forcing them to come closer is not especially a good idea because there are long range threats like lock ons, av mana turrets and we are often forced to fight at the render distance so to have a chance to survive during large battles.
  To sum up, reducing thé effective range makes us weaker because they made thé MBTs not enough "durable".
  This is another thing to keep in mind.

The only changes that need to be made regarding Liberators are to increase Skyguard damage at close range, and to turn the duster into a useful weapon that doesn't encroach on the existing weapons.

Some are comparing this to the Harrasser nerf. I hope it comes out that way because now the Harrasser performs like a dune buggy and not a n MBT. The Lib should not be the best vehicle in the game, it should be a situational vehicle. People spending all day in a Lib shows it has been made to be something it shouldn't.

PS2 should mainly be about territory battles. Get rid of teleporting everywhere, make ground the primary focus.

Also, tanks are primarily used in this game to farm infantry. Maybe if libs are nerfed people will actually have to have more tank battles.

"Tank effective ranges are being reduced."
You're kidding right? I mean hurray stabilization but this just ruins the good news.

• Rocket pod effectiveness against vehicles is being reduced.
  • They are all around to good. Good at killing infantry and good at killing vehicles.
  • Lowering their effectiveness against vehicles further defines the Liberator as the anti-vehicle air option.

So what are they supposed to be for then? Seriously you gave us these nice in theory hornet missiles, why not make them the AV option and leave rocket pods as moderately good for AV and AI.
They are not that great, it takes half a magazine for one guy, and a magazine upgrade and all shots to the rear for a tank kill.
Under normal circumstances (for me that means highly contested areas) one cannot usually even finish off smoking retreating vehicles. Which really should be their niche. (My ideal, before the tantalizing possibility of actual mobile warfare between armor columns promised by these tweaks, was that tanks rarely kill each other outright, relying on support from infantry pushes and air to deliver the killing blows.)
--also it's been at least a month since I played

Sure once with biggest threat to tanks is nerfed. (the overabundant and overpowered Infantry based AV)

The devs NOW think tanks should be mobile close range units. So they nerf ranged effectiveness of all tank weapons with the biggest nerfs going towards TR. (Vanu get nerfed the least)

Yet TR has Anchor mode which is designed for using your tank as Immobile long range artillery unit. If you want MBT's to be mobile units how about giving TR a on the move ability like NC's force shield or vanu's turbo so we are not left with the one ability that is nerfed the most by these changes because you don't want us being immobile long range units?

Moin

And yet there are people who only play infantry, using vehicles only as transports to the next base, who feel qualified to talk about balance nontheless. That's what's wrong, not the liberator.
So the harasser now rightfully "performs like a dune buggy", but Infantry Joe lives through an HE shell shot directly at his feet. Don't try to come with RL arguments, you can only lose. The harasser is in a poor state atm, only some bad, biased and/or vengeful players deny that.
Also

shows just how bad your understanding of the game and its mechanics is. We have tanks killing infantry because

a) there isn't much else to do once the enemys tanks are destroyed and
b) it's their freaking job to kill infantry.
If most players wouldn't suck so much at this game or gaming in general they wouldn't be killed by vehicles so often.

The lib shouldn't become "situational", it should have a specific role. And by that I don't mean a rock-paper-scissor role like A2G craft, but a role that fits a certain playstyle. You have cheap, paper-armored, fast and agile ESFs with 1 seat and you have (more) expensive, heavy armored, slower, less agile gunships with 3 seats. That's variety, that's fun.
Demanding that the liberator should become a dedicated A2G aircraft with ESFs as A2A counter to them is like demanding MBTs becoming AI only and Lightnings AP only to hunt them down. Or demanding that AP shells shouldn't kill infantry or aircrafts, because it's an AV weapon. Versatility and skillbased use of weapons for non intented purpose is a good thing for a competitive game. Rock-paper-scissor balance is a bad thing for a competitive game.
For a player who plays this game primarily as a shooter and not some RTS hybrid your ideas are horrible.

******* horrible. Libs are already trash outside of 12-24 fights, and hitting anything moving with a dalton is already extremely difficult. This will make libs big XP pinatas for ESFs, which will be impossible to hit. The only thing that makes a lib vs ESF fight interesting is the faint possibility that the ESF will get daltoned. Now ESFs will be able to solo kill liberators every time. That's ******* stupid--a one man aircraft should not be able to kill a three man aircraft every time.

All you had to do was nerf the OP as **** shredder. The dalton and zepher are not a problem. The shredder is a ******** hose. That's where libs are overperforming, especially against infantry and MAXes. It also might help if bases had ANY AIR COVER AT ALL.

STOP REWARDING SCRUBS AND NERFING THE ONLY THINGS THAT REWARD SKILLED PLAYERS. I have spent a lot of time getting good with the dalton so that I can (occasionally) hit air targets in order to keep the lib alive. If there is more than one ESF on us at any given time we will usually die anyway.
IF YOU GO THROUGH WITH THIS EXCESSIVE AND UNBALANCED NERF I WILL CANCEL MY SUBSCRIPTION.
I've had it with all the "balancing" which is actually balancing skilled players with people who have no idea what they're doing.


The tank changes are ******* stupid too. The only thing the magrider has going for it is its ability to run and gun and attack from distance or flanks. These changes aim to turn all tank battles into a close range moving slugfest. Guess what...in a close range slugfest the Vanguard wins every time. Every. *******. Time. That's what it is designed for.
Stabilizing turrets to 'open up new tactics' just opens up the Magrider's only advantage to all the other factions. In fact. It hands TR and NC the advantage as they can now circle around targets or flee while firing continually, while the Magrider has to be pointed forward at their target to attack.


tl;dr: SOE making tank and air game bland and boring as ****. Unsubscribing if/when these changes hit.

Wow... Long silence regarding the Liberator, now suddenly - word of the thoughts behind the scenes.
Very Nice.

Will be interesting to see how it works, I am willing to try anything. Will log in again with that info, thought the issue was forgotten and discarded ;-)

[A small concern, but thats only peripheral to the issues talked about: The Skyguard still hasn't that much "Cert" reason to deploy]

Nice going forward and showing signs of activity in the official forum.

Not sure about the changes to tanks, but I will see how it works out, and even live with a comparativly weaker Magrider (if it really comes that way), if the Liberator changes work out.
IF a weaker comparitivly Magrider is temporarily, of course ;-)

Vanu nerfed the least? What are you smoking?

The TR gets to keep their massive damage output and now get even more mobility than the Magrider. What do the MAgrider get? Even ****tier velocity than it already had.

Even without the Anchor, the Prowler outDPS any other tank.

I would GLADLY give you our Magfart if we got your anchor.

"Our toy doesn't work so nerf theirs"

How about asking to get Marauder/Canister fixed instead eh mate?

AV secondaries AI capacity has been significantly reduced, so we need the AI options to be good to warrant giving up AV capability.

The fury retains some AV capacity and so should be slightly inferior to the ES AI turrets for killing infantry, and the easiest way to significantly help that is ammo and mag capacity. That's all marauder needs. Canister needs a lil more range normalization too.

I've seen too many videos of magriders owning face to feel that way. But one can't judge by videos alone. My question though, is magazine size. Why does the upgraded PPA have a ludicrous 70 ammo size? Should the other factions AI only weapons be brought up to snuff?

I agree with this statement of PURE fact. I play everything, as should everyone. I'm sp tired of people who have never flown or even gunned a lib acting like they know it all.

When someone says somthing stupid like all you sky gods need to die, they are clearly ignorant.

Why waste time changing something you just changed when THERMALS are the problem?

Even at the height of rocket pod and Lib OPness back in the early days of the game i never died to them nearly as much as i died to tanks. I still die way way more to tanks than i do to libs or ESF which i almost never die to. Tanks even kill me more than infanty do when im playing infantry.

So im all for nerfing all vehicle spam vs infantry and likewise reducing infantry spam to vehicles, but libs were the only thing that could bust up a tank farm zerg.

Now you will once again see 100 tanks at every base. Until they nerf those and then it will be back to the HA and SMG infs needing a nerf, and then since SMG and HA have been nerfed there will be a lot more snipers so those will need nerfed.

Meanwhile buff EZ mode flak and lock-ons cause those are the weapons that the vast vast majority of players prefer to use.

I personally don't care. If it had a 70 round magazine then sure, maybe I would use it over the Kobalt, but I hardly ever pull AI unless there is something important I have to do.

Hi Kevin,

Thank you for taking the time on the weekend to clarify some things for us.

I've been mostly talking about lib changes because it seemed a bit too heavy handed in my opinion. Now after getting more details on the tank changes I think it's a bit odd ... extremely odd ... (wait, gravity is going up 25%) bizarre.

Originally you mentioned you wanted tanks to get closer to their targets to have them more involved in the battle and make it more interesting and exciting. (why?) I'm not sure what philosophy of tank combat or what information you have that is supporting that, but I would like to understand it. The whole reduce combat ranges is somewhat strange from my perspective.

I don't believe I'm the best Vanguard driver out there, but I do feel I can say that I am one of the best. I would say my specialization of top tier tankers is accuracy (60%+) and flanking. I've spent 630+ hours in a vanguard firing over 100,000+ shells killing tens of thousands of enemies. I've experienced a lot of different situations in tanking in either zergs, farms, solo, flanking A2A, Tank to tank, tank to infantry, and getting my tank in places the map designers do not want me to be (Don't give up, keep trying guys~). It can kinda skew my view on things quite a bit to where something that might be good for me may not be good for the average player. I'm wondering if this is causing me to be unaware of how important some of other problems of tank gameplay that other players go through that I don't have issues with. Like I had no idea that the stock reverse speed on a Vanguard was just as fast as infantry sprinting because it's been almost 2 years since I've had stock. I've seen some of your previous statements and I'm not quite sure I get them. Is that the main reason for the range nerf?

You also said something like this before in an article about Nanite Auto Repair (NAR)

To me the change didn't matter too much since I only equip NAR to fight infantry. I never found it as useful as Stealth in tank vs tank battles. Actually from talking to others it seems that most of the top tier tankers use Stealh in their AP loadouts, but the common player uses NAR. Repairing is important, but I think the main problem was that the tanks couldn't close the gap because they can't easily shoot and move. The only tank that could shoot and move couldn't shoot accurately because their projectile velocity is on the low end of the spectrum and the gun is locked to their hull (Magrider) with no ability to see what is on their flanks making them nervous to push up.

I've said it before in this thread, but personally I'm not interested in a range reduction of tanks. If you are talking about the stop & fire playstyle that tanks are today, that's mainly because of the lack of turret stabilization. Yes, I can still hit things while moving, but it's not easy unless it's really flat ground. Even on flat ground, the brakes on the Vanguard force me to correct my shot angle at times by as much as five+ degrees before I can fire. In the current setup with no stabilization in a long range fight, the stationary tank has the advantage (unless it's a Magrider). You can't easily close the gap with the enemy because they will mow you down with better accuracy. This is like if walking gave you 500% cone of fire with infantry guns for a few seconds. Nobody would run out of cover to close the gap with the enemy if you can't return fire reliably when you need to without coming to a standstill for a few seconds. The game would turn into Campside 2.

At long range I can dodge enemy projectiles in my Vanguard without too much trouble (anchored AP might still hit it's marks though through spam) but because there is no stabilization, this prevents me from being able to fire back. With the stabilization changes presented, I will be able to dodge projectiles at range and return fire using current velocities. If the enemy wants to hit me, they will most likely have to come in closer unless they have equal or greater skill in accuracy. I could also charge them with Vanguard fortress like defense without worrying about my turret bouncing around too much. This should be enough to break up the stalemates.

To me the range reduction just seems like a Vanguard buff. Everyone knows that even a noob in a Vanguard is going to steamroll you if you get into a brawl-range fight with it. At long range a Vanguard is just going to turn sideways and strafe where it's side armor is just as strong as the other MBT's fronts. Meanwhile, the Magrider at range will not have enough strafe speed or velocity to counter this, and the Prowler doesn't care about dodging shots or firing on the move because it will most likely just anchor down anyways. I think this is all backwards.

If any tank were to be buffed, I want it to be the Magrider. I think in total of the thousands of tanks destroyed by me, I've seen like 3 Magrider pilots whom I though "wow I'm actually having a hard time hitting this guy". The Prowler can out DPS it to death as long as it's not almost on top of them, and the Vanguard can win a 1v1 just by pointing it's front armor at them, doesn't even need to use the shield to win (will hurt a lot though). It's slow in both movement and strafe, it's projectile has bad velocity and drop, the gun is fixed looking in one direction, the pilot can't see behind them, if you get stuck on something you can't correct your aim, and they can't use third person view to quickly sweep the area to extend their situational awareness. To me that bad trashy tank is just complete garbage.

You already hit your target of opening more mobile, engaging, and close range combats with the turret stabilization, but then you overshoot it by reducing velocity and increasing gravity. To paint it differently it's like adding SMG's & Shotguns and then removing Sniper Rifles and Battle Rifles at the same time.


For infantry players reading this, just so it's understood, this will have absolutely 0. NONE AT ALL impact on tank zergs camping a base. Infantry does not render to tanks beyond 300 meters unless it's like 1 person in the middle of an empty field. The server breaks up areas into mini-zones, and based on how many zones around you are over-saturated with infantry it will reduce the number of adjacent zones that it will send information to your client about to maintain a target max number of infantry. Ever see those fights where people start rendering less than 50 meters away? You cannot change this on your client, it is entirely controlled by the server.

If tanks want to engage infantry, they have to get within 200-300 meters anyways. And 98% of the time, when a tank is engaging infantry, it's with HEAT and HE. Yes, you will be occasionally be killed by an AP round, but that's because they ran out of vehicles to destroy. The main point with those guns in the splash damage. The tank driver doesn't really care how long it takes to get to the area they are bombarding, because they just have to sit there and shell the base to pieces. Gravity could be ****ing 10 meters per second down and it wouldn't matter to them, they would still sit the same distances they do now, shelling the same ways they do now. The only difference is they would have to point their gun barrels at almost 45 degrees and will now probably see that Light Assault with drifters coming to C4 them.

If that was what you were talking about tanks sitting around not being mobile then I'm sorry Kevin, it's flat out not going to happen.
Fat
Chance
They will continue to sit there doing what they always do, shelling a base. And I will have to put my tank at a much greater risk of getting closer just to counter them.

The only change I see this impacting the most is the Anti-vehicle tanks. The AP ones that come in and try to save the day by picking off tanks in a massive armor zerg. They can't get too close because if they are horribly outnumbered. But soon farmers won't have to worry about that, because they will have to get closer to attack them. Then their buddies can all fight back at the same time.

This is detrimental to actual gameplay experiance. Farmers are like a cancer in this game that just takes fun at the expense of others. Sure I will pull a HEAT loadout every once in a while, but I try not to do it too often.



To give you guys a rough idea of how the gravity change is going to work out, go use a Titan-150 HEAT, and then use a Titan-150 HE. That difference in drop is about the same you are going to feel on all tank cannons with the new gravity value. The speed of the projectile won't be as slow (time it takes to get there), but the range is about right.

To compare the differences the gravity and velocity changes that are proposed, if you were to take each tank gun and mount it 4 meters off the ground and fire it at a 0 degree angle on flat ground you would get the numbers below (note that the prowler cannons are actually mounted at almost 5 meters above the ground, Vanguard at about 3.9/4, and Magrider at about 3.9-4.2 depending on chassis. If we use 4 as a constant it will be easier to see the difference) :

• Titan-150 AP
  • With gravity (4), Velocity (275) - will hit the ground at about 275 meters
  • With gravity (5), Velocity (245) - will hit the ground at about 196 meters
• Titan-150 HEAT
  • With gravity (4), Velocity (250) - will hit the ground at about 250 meters
  • With gravity (5), Velocity (230) - will hit the ground at about 184 meters
• Titan-150 HE
  • With gravity (4), Velocity (175) - will hit the ground at about 175 meters
  • With gravity (5), Velocity (175) - will hit the ground at about 140 meters
• Supernova FPC
  • With gravity (4), Velocity (225) - will hit the ground at about 225 meters
  • With gravity (5), Velocity (215) - will hit the ground at about 180 meters
• Supernova PC
  • With gravity (4), Velocity (200) - will hit the ground at about 200 meters
  • With gravity (5), Velocity (200) - will hit the ground at about 160 meters
• Supernova VPC
  • With gravity (4), Velocity (175) - will hit the ground at about 175 meters
  • With gravity (5), Velocity (175) - will hit the ground at about 140 meters
• P2-120 AP
  • With gravity (4), Velocity (250) - will hit the ground at about 250 meters
  • With gravity (5), Velocity (230) - will hit the ground at about 184 meters
  • Lockdown gravity (4), Velocity (325) - will hit the ground at about 325 meters
  • Lockdown gravity (5), Velocity (299) - will hit the ground at about 239 meters
• P2-120 HEAT
  • With gravity (4), Velocity (225) - will hit the ground at about 225 meters
  • With gravity (5), Velocity (215) - will hit the ground at about 180 meters
  • Lockdown gravity (4), Velocity (292.5) - will hit the ground at about 234 meters
  • Lockdown gravity (5), Velocity (279.5) - will hit the ground at about 223.6 meters
• P2-120 HE
  • With gravity (4), Velocity (175) - will hit the ground at about 175 meters
  • With gravity (5), Velocity (175) - will hit the ground at about 140 meters
  • Lockdown gravity (4), Velocity (227.5) - will hit the ground at about 227 meters
  • Lockdown gravity (5), Velocity (227.5) - will hit the ground at about 182 meters

I'm sorry, but this is definitely a Magrider and Prowler nerf. Magrider pilots already complain about how terrible their shell drop is, and now it's going to be worse? The Vanguard will still be fine because SHIELD + higher velocity. At range it will dodge shells with it's 65kph strafe speed and turret stabilization and up close the shield will help decimate their enemies. The ability to hit mobile targets is already going to make accuracy at range more difficult with the gravity and velocity of current shells.

It's my strong opinion that we don't need lower velocity and gravity and in fact I was thinking of doing the opposite. Gravity just flat out should not change. Like I'm getting feels of when tanks had a that idea of Cone of Fire / Deviation (wdf? downgrade from WWII to WWI tanks?) kind of Bad in Beta:



I wish I had recorded my experience with it, that was terrible.

With the changes with mobility you put up less the range reduction, I would actually go for changes like the following:

• All Dumbfire rocket launchers will have their velocity increased by 100%.
  • I can currently dodge these terrible weapons in a Vanguard. A Vanguard. They don't do a lot of damage and they are really slow. With the mobility update this will be even worse. There's no reason for infantry rockets to fly that slow.
• Magrider strafe speed goes up 5-10+ KPH.
  • You can't just take their unique thing and give it to everyone and then leave that awful locked hull tank in the dust. That's clearly bad.
• Projectiles will have the following velocity:
  • Titan 150 AP - 275 m/s
  • Titan 150 HEAT - 260 m/s
  • Titan 150 HE - 175 m/s
  • P2-120 AP - 260 m/s
  • P2-120 HEAT - 245 m/s
  • P2-120 HE - 175 m/s
  • Supernova FPC - 245 m/s
  • Supernova PC - 230 m/s
  • Supernova VPC - 175 m/s

Bam everything is balanced out. Infantry can hit the mobile tanks. Farmers don't care because splash. Magriders can strafe with their fronts pointing at the enemy, and get a velocity buff to compensate for the enemy getting mobility and being harder to hit. The Prowler gets a slight velocity buff to compensate for lockdown being slightly outdated by mobility & increased reverse speed of enemies retreating to cover...


Wait, lets talk about that in the next post (character limit)

Having the reverse speed the same as the forward movement speed is nutty. I do think increasing reverse speed is a good idea, but the numbers you are talking about seem crazy. A Vanguard is going to be able to pop shield and reverse at 65 KPH. That tank has issues with overcommitting but will then be able to pull out home free. Tanks targeted by an anchored prowler at long range will be able to run away at full speed to cover while keeping their front armor facing the enemy. The Magrider will no longer be able to circle around and flank an enemy tank because they will be reversing away just as fast if not faster. This again seems like just another Vanguard buff and Magrider nerf.

Increasing reverse speed is ok. Except for maybe the Magrider, tanks in this game reverse pretty slowly, so more speed would be nice. However 100% of front movement speed is way too much though when combined with Racer, and would make the game seem somewhat cartoony. I mean, even an M1A2 tank can only reverse at, 32 KPH? This is a game, so comparisons to real life don't matter too much, but 65-70 KPH just feels way over the top. What I would do is have reverse speed be 75% of your forward movement speed unless you have Rival, which makes reverse speed 100% of your forward speed. This way Rival is not outdated and Racer does not become totally insanely OP.

To give you some numbers:

• Vanguard
  • Currently
    • Stock Forward - 55 KPH
    • Stock Reverse - 22 KPH (people can run this fast, you literally can't get further away from them, at several thousand meters they will eventually catch up - Probably why Vanguards die to C4 more)
    • Racer Forward - 65 KPH
    • Racer Reverse - 25 KPH
    • Rival Forward - 55 KPH
    • Rival Reverse - 29 KPH
  • 100% Reverse Speed
    • Stock Forward - 55 KPH
    • Stock Reverse - 55 KPH
    • Racer Forward - 65 KPH
    • Racer Reverse - 65 KPH
    • Rival Forward - 55 KPH
    • Rival Reverse - 55 KPH
  • Proposed 75% Reverse + Rival 100%
    • Stock Forward - 55 KPH
    • Stock Reverse - 41 KPH
    • Racer Forward - 65 KPH
    • Racer Reverse - 48-49 KPH
    • Rival Forward - 55 KPH
    • Rival Reverse - 55 KPH
• Prowler
  • Currently
    • Stock Forward - 60 KPH
    • Stock Reverse - 25 KPH
    • Racer Forward - 70-71 KPH
    • Racer Reverse - 28 KPH
    • Rival Forward - 60 KPH
    • Rival Reverse - 32 KPH
  • 100% Reverse Speed
    • Stock Forward - 60 KPH
    • Stock Reverse - 60 KPH
    • Racer Forward - 70 KPH
    • Racer Reverse - 70 KPH
    • Rival Forward - 60 KPH
    • Rival Reverse - 60 KPH
  • Proposed 75% Reverse + Rival 100%
    • Stock Forward - 60 KPH
    • Stock Reverse - 45 KPH
    • Racer Forward - 70-71 KPH
    • Racer Reverse - 52-53 KPH
    • Rival Forward - 60 KPH
    • Rival Reverse - 60 KPH
• Magrider
  • Currently
    • Stock Forward - 50 KPH
    • Stock Reverse - 32 KPH
    • Racer Forward - 65 KPH
    • Racer Reverse - 36 KPH
    • Rival Forward - 50 KPH
    • Rival Reverse - 42 KPH
  • 100% Reverse Speed
    • Stock Forward - 50 KPH
    • Stock Reverse - 50 KPH
    • Racer Forward - 65 KPH
    • Racer Reverse - 65 KPH
    • Rival Forward - 50 KPH
    • Rival Reverse - 50 KPH
  • Proposed 85% Reverse + Rival 110% *
    • Stock Forward - 50 KPH
    • Stock Reverse - 42.5 KPH
    • Racer Forward - 65 KPH
    • Racer Reverse - 55 KPH
    • Rival Forward - 50 KPH
    • Rival Reverse - 55 KPH

* Magrider reverse speed with Rival is 55 KPH to make up for the fact that the current Magrider reverse is much higher than the average tank's. This is to help mitigate the buff to the Vanguard and Prowler and improve Magrider mobility. Rival serves a different purpose for the Magrider than reverse compared to Racer as it will boost the already boosted (see further above) strafe speed.

The 100% method just looks like another buff to Vanguard and Prowlers over the Magrider as it reverses the roles from the Magrider being the best at backing up and gives it entirely to the Prowler & Vanguard.

I'm curious about what the other potential perks to Rival there could be that you mentioned. Are you able to throw that out to the community with a speculation / theorycrafting disclaimer?


I know testing things is difficult when you aren't able to produce the same situations as you get on live and that's why we sometimes see things like unstabilized secondary weapons, spawn on every Sunderer on the continent, Libs eat AP rounds for breakfast and such.

It kinda annoys people though if it's too extreme:

I'm assuming that's what the purpose of this thread is now, to help us help you to help us all.

At the very least if you were to take anything from this thread, I would recommend you do not do mobility and reduced range at the same time.