DUST Search - The proper way to balance tank vs AV

Chances Ghost wrote:

alot of angry discussion has been going around about tank vs AV balance and alot of flame wars have been started as a result.

Balance

the core of it seems to stem from everyones definition of "Balance"

they try to use metrics like 1v1, and justify things with ISK cost or SP cost or other factors that really dont belong in the discussion.
You are disregarding major flaw in AV vs HAVs by saying it doesn't belong in any discussions.

let me explain something about balance in a video game, or any game for that matter.

something is balanced when it creates the type of gameplay you want to see in the game. thats it, thats all there is to it.
so something that completly dominates absolutly everything would be perfectly balanced in a game where that was the intended result.

imbalance is when gameplay isnt happening how you want it to and its creating circumstances that invalidate other areas of the game.

in terms of tank vs AV in Dust 514 we have to ask ourselves what we cant tank gameplay to be like and how do we get there.

The gameplay we want to see?

Naturally this means that any discussion about balancing these two things HAS to include discussion about what you want tank VS AV gameplay to look like and how you want that to interact with Infantry VS Infantry gameplay and every other interaction.

this isnt happening in any tank VS AV disscussion on the forum so lets bring it here

well what DO we want it to look like

well its a givin that we want vehicles to have a place in the game we want them to have a reason to be on the field and we want them to be useful.

currently they dont, infantry hold ALL the power and it renders tanks without a role. infantry are better at killing other infantry, and infantry are better at killing tanks, with a few exceptions.

the only advantage to a tank is that it takes specific AV weaponry to do damage to you making it easyer for you to engage infantry while remaining safe from their fire.
4 of 5 weapons do major damage to it. SLs, FGs, AVnades and Flux nades. The 5th is the PC however no where in the weapons description does talk about anything remotely AV.

The Current Problem

the current problem is the AV dominance is in the hands of infantry, which means infantry are more effective at the anti tank role than tanks are.

this creates a situation where tanks are in a role where they are slightly more effective against infantry in exchange for infantry being able to wipe them off the face of the each on a whim.
AV grenades man.

how can we fix this?

that depends on what kind of gameplay you want to see?

currently theres no reason in competitive play to bring out a tank, it serves no function in any battle plans other than you really want to use one.

IF we want to see vehicle combat then obviously we need to change some things.

one way to do this would be to make tanks better at taking out tanks then infantry are.
They already are. Madrugars murder every other HAV out there.

this would change it so that the best way to take out a tank would be to use another tank, without a tank you would have to group up a number of infantry and come at the tank in numbers to take it out

this is what most tankers refer to when they say you shouldn't be able to solo a tank as infantry

they arn't trying to make themselves invulnerable, they are just trying to make it so that they fight tanks for vehicle dominance while not rendering infantry AV obsolete.

this change would make infantry AV an AV support role, working WITH the tanks to take out other tanks rather then replacing them as they currently do. this would also change it so that tanks would carry around gunner specfed into AV to give them an edge in tank VS tank wars, creating tank oriented squad gameplay rather then the solo warrior gameplay we see now.

AVers seem to think tankers want to nerf them so that they become invincible, and thats not true, they want to nerf you so that they have a place in the game, and most importantly they want to play with you, be in squads with you, and co-operate with you instead of you not needing tanks at all.

Closing

In short tankers who argue for nerfs to av are doing it to create a place for tanks in he game, they are currently replaced by a single infantry wielding AV and its creating boring/ stale/ and not engaging gameplay.

what tankers want is a role in he game, and most importantly they want a reason to exist, as currently they roll in tanks because they want to rather then it being viable.

TLDR - tankers just want to love AV players and squad with them so stop hating them
What we want are features that have been left out and not being soloed by things we cost in every way 8x more. AV grenades solo tanks so that would make HAV costs 20x more.

before posting answer 2 questions

1:what kind of tank/av/infantry gameplay do you want to see
1:one suggestion on how to achieve that vision of balance


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Xender17 Ahrendee Mercenaries EoN. 487	Posted - 2013.08.24 16:38:00 - [1] - Quote Chances Ghost wrote: alot of angry discussion has been going around about tank vs AV balance and alot of flame wars have been started as a result. Balance the core of it seems to stem from everyones definition of "Balance" they try to use metrics like 1v1, and justify things with ISK cost or SP cost or other factors that really dont belong in the discussion. You are disregarding major flaw in AV vs HAVs by saying it doesn't belong in any discussions. let me explain something about balance in a video game, or any game for that matter. something is balanced when it creates the type of gameplay you want to see in the game. thats it, thats all there is to it. so something that completly dominates absolutly everything would be perfectly balanced in a game where that was the intended result. imbalance is when gameplay isnt happening how you want it to and its creating circumstances that invalidate other areas of the game. in terms of tank vs AV in Dust 514 we have to ask ourselves what we cant tank gameplay to be like and how do we get there. The gameplay we want to see? Naturally this means that any discussion about balancing these two things HAS to include discussion about what you want tank VS AV gameplay to look like and how you want that to interact with Infantry VS Infantry gameplay and every other interaction. this isnt happening in any tank VS AV disscussion on the forum so lets bring it here well what DO we want it to look like well its a givin that we want vehicles to have a place in the game we want them to have a reason to be on the field and we want them to be useful. currently they dont, infantry hold ALL the power and it renders tanks without a role. infantry are better at killing other infantry, and infantry are better at killing tanks, with a few exceptions. the only advantage to a tank is that it takes specific AV weaponry to do damage to you making it easyer for you to engage infantry while remaining safe from their fire. 4 of 5 weapons do major damage to it. SLs, FGs, AVnades and Flux nades. The 5th is the PC however no where in the weapons description does talk about anything remotely AV. The Current Problem the current problem is the AV dominance is in the hands of infantry, which means infantry are more effective at the anti tank role than tanks are. this creates a situation where tanks are in a role where they are slightly more effective against infantry in exchange for infantry being able to wipe them off the face of the each on a whim. AV grenades man. how can we fix this? that depends on what kind of gameplay you want to see? currently theres no reason in competitive play to bring out a tank, it serves no function in any battle plans other than you really want to use one. IF we want to see vehicle combat then obviously we need to change some things. one way to do this would be to make tanks better at taking out tanks then infantry are. They already are. Madrugars murder every other HAV out there. this would change it so that the best way to take out a tank would be to use another tank, without a tank you would have to group up a number of infantry and come at the tank in numbers to take it out this is what most tankers refer to when they say you shouldn't be able to solo a tank as infantry they arn't trying to make themselves invulnerable, they are just trying to make it so that they fight tanks for vehicle dominance while not rendering infantry AV obsolete. this change would make infantry AV an AV support role, working WITH the tanks to take out other tanks rather then replacing them as they currently do. this would also change it so that tanks would carry around gunner specfed into AV to give them an edge in tank VS tank wars, creating tank oriented squad gameplay rather then the solo warrior gameplay we see now. AVers seem to think tankers want to nerf them so that they become invincible, and thats not true, they want to nerf you so that they have a place in the game, and most importantly they want to play with you, be in squads with you, and co-operate with you instead of you not needing tanks at all. Closing In short tankers who argue for nerfs to av are doing it to create a place for tanks in he game, they are currently replaced by a single infantry wielding AV and its creating boring/ stale/ and not engaging gameplay. what tankers want is a role in he game, and most importantly they want a reason to exist, as currently they roll in tanks because they want to rather then it being viable. TLDR - tankers just want to love AV players and squad with them so stop hating them What we want are features that have been left out and not being soloed by things we cost in every way 8x more. AV grenades solo tanks so that would make HAV costs 20x more. before posting answer 2 questions 1:what kind of tank/av/infantry gameplay do you want to see 1:one suggestion on how to achieve that vision of balance Replies are in bold print.