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.


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.


The Current Problem

the current problem is the AV dominance is in the hands of infantry, wich 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.

accurate problems mentioned in thread
https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1216479#post1216479

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 battleplans 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.


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 shouldnt be able to solo a tank as infantry

they arnt 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 orented squad gameplay rather then the solo warrior gameplay we see now.



AVers seem to think tankers want to nerf them so that they become invincable, 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 int he game, they are currently replaced by a single infantry wielding AV and its creating boring/ stale/ and unengaging gameplay.

what tankers want is a role int he game, and most importantly they want a reason to exsist, 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


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


invisable swarm footage for the curious skip to 5:50 and watch for left side impact, no trail, no explosive effect just impact physics

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2HwiIU6rJCk

if you watch a any vehicle youtube footage with invisable swarms in mind you can spot them everywhere.

I don't really agree with that ... you still have to balance vehicles against infantry and AV infantry in the same way you have to balance infantry Av against regular infantry.

It's unbalanced if AV infantry is gimped to the point it can't withstand a single bullet from an assault rifle ... conversely it's unbalanced if AV infantry isn't gimped at all and can stand toe to toe with regular infantry, as I used to manage with the flaylock :-) ... this is also an issue with the Forge being, in my opinion, a bit too effective against infantry, but that's another debate.

balance is about making the game fun for everyone ... HAV's running the field un-impeded by anything but a stronger HAV as they did back in E3 is unbalanced in the same way the Caldari Logi was unbalanced against other infantry, or Heavies were in Mordus Trials, or Missile Turrets or anything else we've seen.

Basically anything that makes your game fun, makes someone elses game not fun ... THAT is what needs to be balanced, and it's not something I'd want to crunch numbers for when there are so many variables in a game like DUST.

also, if you were to separate the main gunner from the pilot seat, you would remove all incentive and want to skill up into driving it

Again cause some on here would rather not hear it, for the simple fact of "DUST IS NOT A FPS! IT DOESNT HAVE TO FOLLOW ITS RULES!"

There is a reason why in Almost all FPS games, TANKS ARE NOT A PRIMARY ROLE. THEY ALWAYS FALL UNDER "SUPPORT"

You want to see tanks and DS all over the field? LOWER THE PRICE. BUT to those that feel that you need 4 guys to down a tank, come on!

So a scrub that never touched a FPS can jump in a tank and wipe the floor with PLAYERS THAT HAVE PLAYED FPS GAMES? 50-2 for a fairy that never touched a FPS game? NO.

Like the OP says- vehicles vs AV is completely about developer preference. You can't statistically prove one is better than the other, because they're completely different. How vehicles vs AV should work is all your own opinion.

you mean something like this?

the way I would balance things is like this:


1 prototype tank = 3 prototype AV
1 advanced tank = 3 advanced AV
1 standard tank = 3 standard AV

however, if you have blue in your turrets, they will give you an extra survivability only if they have the same skill set as you do, this would also be needing the vehicle lock function we all want, that way if the right people were in the tank, it would be indestructible, but if its only the pilot, the tank would be killable but still do massive amounts of damage, nothing less.

this would greatly encourage the teamwork you want us to use, but it would have to be done right, and by right, I mean the pilot needs to have complete dominance over his own asset, otherwise tanks and vehicles in general would just be like BF.






also:

Pay to Win: Games that let you buy better gear or allow you to make better items then everyone else at a faster rate and then makes the game largely unbalanced even for people who have skill in the game without paying.

I'm glad you're not a dev. It should NEVER take more than one person to take out one other person. Your balancing sounds "fine" with small numbers, but increase the numbers a bit and you can see how unbalanced it is.

1 tank = 3 AV (half a squad to take out on person)
2 tanks = 6 AV (whole squad to take out 2 people)
5 tanks = 15 AV (whole team to take out a single squad)

See the pattern? That's not balance, that's a crutch.

It should take one DEDICATED AVer to take out one dedicated tanker of the same meta level. Not an assault suit with AV grenades, but a fully specced and fitted AVer.

If you notice, it already works out like this if you pit Std AV gear against std tanks. There is no problen between AV and Tanks except for cost and the lack of ADV and PRO HAVs.

I'm glad you're not a dev. It should NEVER take more than one person to take out one other person. Your balancing sounds "fine" with small numbers, but increase the numbers a bit and you can see how unbalanced it is.

1 tank = 3 AV (half a squad to take out on person)
2 tanks = 6 AV (whole squad to take out 2 people)
5 tanks = 15 AV (whole team to take out a single squad)

See the pattern? That's not balance, that's a crutch.

It should take one DEDICATED AVer to take out one dedicated tanker of the same meta level. Not an assault suit with AV grenades, but a fully specced and fitted AVer.

If you notice, it already works out like this if you pit Std AV gear against std tanks. There is no problen between AV and Tanks except for cost and the lack of ADV and PRO HAVs.

with my version of it, if you have more than one tank on the field all you need is 3 AV guys on you team, they would be able to destroy each enemy tank in a 3 man group, your saying that AVers are too unreliable to take down more than one tank so you say it needs a full team...


why in your head does this mean that you need an entire team? in my head all you need is 3 people to kill us off, if 3 av = 1 tank, then those same 3 would be used to kill the others off..

with my version of it, if you have more than one tank on the field all you need is 3 AV guys on you team, they would be able to destroy each enemy tank in a 3 man group, your saying that AVers are too unreliable to take down more than one tank so you say it needs a full team...


why in your head does this mean that you need an entire team? in my head all you need is 3 people to kill us off, if 3 av = 1 tank, then those same 3 would be used to kill the others off..

You realize if you stay in AV you are disadvantaged to infantry on the other team? You'll still be 3 men down in infantry.

That's assuming the three tanks are seperated and can be dealt with individually. What if those tanks stick together? There are tankers that do this now and can completely dominate a match. Nice try grabbing at straws though.

Again cause some on here would rather not hear it, for the simple fact of "DUST IS NOT A FPS! IT DOESNT HAVE TO FOLLOW ITS RULES!"

There is a reason why in Almost all FPS games, TANKS ARE NOT A PRIMARY ROLE. THEY ALWAYS FALL UNDER "SUPPORT"

You want to see tanks and DS all over the field? LOWER THE PRICE. BUT to those that feel that you need 4 guys to down a tank, come on!

So a scrub that never touched a FPS can jump in a tank and wipe the floor with PLAYERS THAT HAVE PLAYED FPS GAMES? 50-2 for a fairy that never touched a FPS game? NO.

easy, just kill one at a time

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

I still like the idea of a vehicle capacitor that modules run from instead of having cooldowns. This way you could run modules like hardeners perpetually, but an Armor Repairer or Shield Booster would take large amounts of energy, and if you didn't keep an eye on it, it could drain your cap and shut down all your modules, leaving you vulnerable.

If necessary, you could give infantry NON-SEEKING/HOMING grenades that drain energy from vehicles in the blast radius, allowing a skilled AV player to get close and attempt to bring down the vehicle's defenses to make it easier to destroy. However, this would still require the player to get close to the vehicle, and actually AIM their throw properly, which also means that HAVs would have additional incentive to use all three of their guns slots, and allow them additional AV defense.

I think vehicle capacitors would drastically improve the game for vehicle operators across the board.

however, if you have blue in your turrets, they will give you an extra survivability only if they have the same skill set as you do, this would also be needing the vehicle lock function we all want, that way if the right people were in the tank, it would be indestructible, but if its only the pilot, the tank would be killable but still do massive amounts of damage, nothing less.

this would greatly encourage the teamwork you want us to use, but it would have to be done right, and by right, I mean the pilot needs to have complete dominance over his own asset, otherwise tanks and vehicles in general would just be like BF.

How come people can use RL examples on how the AR should be balanced, but when HAV come into play that goes out the window? Double standard much?

At the end of the day, everyone wants their time/ISK/SP invested in their role to mean something. (Most) Infantry have that, why not vehicles?

We don't use RL examples for HAV's cause if that was the case, havs drivers would throw more of a fit. lol

In RL it takes one guy to take our a tank. two at most. Tanks in RL play support roles. hence why it's that way in many FPS games.

We don't use RL examples for HAV's cause if that was the case, havs drivers would throw more of a fit. lol

In RL it takes one guy to take our a tank. two at most. Tanks in RL play support roles. hence why it's that way in many FPS games.

In Chrome, tanks were a force multiplier where pilots would throw their money on the field in hopes of turning the tide of a battle. With proper squad support, good gunners, and disorganized opponents they were invincible. Hell, anything can be invincible with proper teamwork. In Uprising, tanks have degraded to a liability and an afterthought. Think about it, when's the last time someone legitimately complained about tanks in Uprising? If people aren't complaining, something is obviously broken. Same with the laser, shotgun, HMG, and even the mass driver in earlier patches. Tanks need to be beefed up to **** people off again or there's no point in having the role at all.

Are you kidding me? Chrome saw the rise of Tank514. Just call in one tank in an Ambush and go 24-0. It wasn't that long ago, not sure why you would think we would have forgotten about this. :|

Also @VoidEcho okay Strawman, have fun with your straw.

How to solve the problem in chronological order: Lower the cost of tanks > bring out matchmaking > bring out proto/adv tanks > ??? > Profit!

There is no way we can pretend to know about AV/Tank balance at this stage because it's idiotic to compare STD Tanks to Proto AV. Believe it or not, compare a STD tank to MLT AV and you would see that it's just as unbalanced in favor of the tank.