Here I am again. One obscure player suggesting massive changes to a game. Let's begin. 1. MBT buffs and price increase MBTs are made a bit more durable and are given coaxial weaponry. They would cost more to avoid massive armored zerging. Attacking forces would be proper combined-arms forces as opposed to iron tsunamis, and MBTs would be proper strategic tools. 2. Introduction of Gun Carriers GCs would act as Self-Propelled Guns or Tank Destroyers depending on the loadout and would trade armor for firepower, acting as the defense-oriented cousin of the MBT. These would be crewed by one player who could switch between the main gun and a secondary weapon. NC would receive a wheeled and turreted vehicle (similar to Stryker; secondary weapon is coaxial), TR a treaded and hull-armed vehicle (similar to StuG; secondary weapon is turreted), and VS a special sphere-wheeled vehicle (secondary weapon is coaxial). 3. Introduction of Infantry Fighting Vehicles Acting as the middle-ground between MBTs and Sunderers, these vehicles would be armed with an autocannon and a wide selection of coaxials. Able to transport a good number of troops with some able to use their weapons through shielded ports.
Introducing tank hunters (suggestion 2.) sounds good but I find vehicles good enough at killing infantry as they are. The current irl AFVs (suggestion 3.) are pretty similar to the Sundy apart from the suggested ability for infantry in game to fire their weapons out of gun ports. Tbh when I was in service we couldn't wait to get out of the moving coffins and get dirt-side when things got close and personal. The only good thing about them was getting to the FEBA without being pelted by shrapnel and having some fire support once we were there.
We basically have IFV right now. It's literally the Ant. It has 2 seats not including the gunner and driver, has 1 solid turret on it and it's bulky, maneuverable, and an excellent support platform. It's fantastic for pushing with infantry when attacking bases and fortified positions. It's also very easy for infantry to get on and over the Ant which makes it great for scaling walls, or using it as a ramp to get infantry in to the second floor of capture points. It's also narrow enough to fit through a lot of anti-vehicle barriers that keep MBTs and lightnings out but not harrassers and ants. Ant is a very under-rated vehicle imo. And with that upcoming change that allows ants to act as siege weaponry and laser-mine enemy constructables? Mmmmm.......... #2 sounds fantastic though. Like a 2 person Lightning with a fixed gun, and less maneuverability. #1 As an armour player, I actually think they need to add about 25% to 50% increased nanite costs across the board for vehicles. Or reduce the nanite cap to 500. It's so easy to spam armour right now. Myself and my friend can basically spam pull Vanguards by alternating between who pulls and who guns. Or maybe follow suit with some other games that increase the cost of vehicles depending on customisations and attachments. Like Angels Fall First. Fully fit and maxed out Vanguard? 675 nanites. Newb fit vanguard? 400 Nanites.
They don't even need to add more vehicles just give more modules to existing ones and then organise it into presets that lets you see the different offensive, defencive and supportive roles it adds. As long as the change makes it visualy different in some way. Also allows people to easily change into a playstyle that suits their own preferences - im getting tired of the "everyone should be able to do everything" disease that has given this game majority of it's problems :/
Gun carriers? Like the brittish 3 inch gun carrier based on the churchill chassis. Anyway I would like to see new main weapons for tanks before any new vehicles are added. :L
