DUST Search - It Should Take Three - Four AVers To Take Out One Tank

Kuroiokami Tsukinaku wrote:

I would not seperate the driver from the turret. Only one person buys the tank, so that one person should be able to use it. I would rather reduce the effectiveness of the tank if it will not or can not get two gunners. There's nothing wrong with a solo operated HAV. But it should be measurably weaker than a crew operated HAV.

My proposal:
1. Slightly increase the effectivity of small turrets against infantry. We need people to want to crew a tank.
2. Slightly decrease the effectivity of large turrets against infantry. We want tankers to want a crew.
3. Reduce the capabilities of a tank without the crew. I've suggested in the past to give a -10% rate of fire and a -20% scan radius for each unoccupied seat. So the tank is slightly weaker and blind without his crew. I think this would match a quasi-reality as the crew could help load the main turret as well as scan the battlefield.

In the end you still have a tank that is formidable with a solo operator. But, with a crew, it's a war machine deserving AV teamwork to take down.


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Ranger SnakeBlood OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 272	Posted - 2013.12.17 23:08:00 - [1] - Quote Knight Soiaire wrote: Just because there aren't 3 people inside the HAV, doesn't mean the Pilot isn't using teamwork. Your squad is much better off outside your HAV, because they can take out AVers that are camped in areas a HAV cant reach. Doesnt matter because thats still causing a balence issue if it takes 3 guys to kill 1 guy there is issue, it not about tanks supporting a fireteam its bout making a tank require the same amount of people to kill as it does operate so we have 3 choices. 1: nerf the tanks tanking ability so one guy can kill it. 2: Rebalence large turrets to be AV rather than Anti infantry like the blaster so that the solo tank is now a AV and supression platform new role that is not more useful than 1 unit, to be effective against infantry you must have gunners therefore creating a AV v V balence at a 2 or 3 vrs 2 or 3 3: As op stated make it so it requires 2 or 3 people to operate said tank this is by far the best balenced as option 2 leaves proper tankers that want to fully crew them selfs at a weakness to solo tanks. Most infantry want option 1 as its a quick fix and favors them, anyone who actually wants balence and more depth in the game wants option 3 the only real issue with it is its not a quick fix and would take time to implement correctly as it involves tanks being a coop vehicle which it is not at the moment.
Ranger SnakeBlood OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 273	Posted - 2013.12.18 00:13:00 - [2] - Quote What if we take a page out of the old Planetside book which had 2 main tanks the Light tank which i guess in Dust would be the MAV it would be a fast moving (for a tank) that uses a medium sized turret it would be balenced around 1 guy so it can be killed by 1 AV dude 4 hits of the same grade, relitivly cheap 50k at standard fully fitted the crew of this tank would be 1 man. the medium should be a middle ground bettween large and small turrets so its good against infantry and vehicles smaller vehicles mostly but good vrs large vehicles in packs i know this is going against the 1 should be able to kill one untill you take into acount how HAVs should be done. My view on a HAV lets call it the MBT is a 3 man tank it has 3 seats just like that normal tank but to make it so the tank is only effective while fully crewed lets have seat 1 as driver who has access to movement and movement based modules BUT no third person camera instead uses the front mount gun, second seat gunner is the person who uses the main large turret and has access to damage related modules as well as different vision modes including magnification levels and NV and therm just for the laugh, the third seat uses the top small turret and is the only seat with access to the third person view this is the commander seat which has the ability to tag enemies and create waypoints also has access to a scanners and things like that he also controles the defence systems. This thing wouls be quite hard to kill by AV but would require 3 to kill effectively at all. So to sum up this gives a solo and a tank for Real tankers who value team work.
Ranger SnakeBlood OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 278	Posted - 2013.12.18 17:29:00 - [3] - Quote knight of 6 wrote: okay, I've been avoiding this post like the plague but I do have one question. what does the reloader do? does he just sit there enjoying the view pressing one button on occasion? are you so desperate to make it 3 people instead of 2 that you made up a nonsense position that has no purpose just to shove another person in the tank? A loader would be a bad solution as it is outdated even by todays standards, the best option for seat 3 if there is a need for one is commander who is essentially in charge of intel with access to scanners and defensive capabilities and is located in top small turret. There may not be a need for seat 3 but in my opinion this would be the most usefull one. The 2 seat option would be driver and main gunner which would now be a AV weapon in a ideal world.
Ranger SnakeBlood OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 278	Posted - 2013.12.18 17:34:00 - [4] - Quote Kuroiokami Tsukinaku wrote: I would not seperate the driver from the turret. Only one person buys the tank, so that one person should be able to use it. I would rather reduce the effectiveness of the tank if it will not or can not get two gunners. There's nothing wrong with a solo operated HAV. But it should be measurably weaker than a crew operated HAV. My proposal: 1. Slightly increase the effectivity of small turrets against infantry. We need people to want to crew a tank. 2. Slightly decrease the effectivity of large turrets against infantry. We want tankers to want a crew. 3. Reduce the capabilities of a tank without the crew. I've suggested in the past to give a -10% rate of fire and a -20% scan radius for each unoccupied seat. So the tank is slightly weaker and blind without his crew. I think this would match a quasi-reality as the crew could help load the main turret as well as scan the battlefield. In the end you still have a tank that is formidable with a solo operator. But, with a crew, it's a war machine deserving AV teamwork to take down. Ive seen this one come up a few time while i agree its a nice solution it does put crew tankers against solo tankers at a simular disadvantage to the current AV vrs V, in that it would be more effective for someone and 2 friends who wants to kill a tank to bring in 3 solo tanks and hit the crew tank with the main turrets AV, its just something to keep in mind i guess.