Sirys Lyons
Tronhadar Free Guard
Minmatar Republic
19
   |
Posted - 2014.01.11 20:08:00 -
[1] - Quote
Here's a try.
It's an ecosystem problem that is cropping up because all the pieces of the puzzle (still) aren't in place. We need infantry with effective AV weapons, and we need internally balanced vehicles. I'll explain.
Let's start with vehicles. Right now we have LAVs, which are rather vulnerable - you can be shot out of the vehicle and are (generally) not protected by the vehicles shields/armor if someone is aiming for you. This makes this vehicle a great scout vehicle, a great distraction, and useful for occasional, short period of infantry support. Which is about right. Kudos to CCP.
But then we jump immediately from that to the HAVs, which are intended to be far less vulnerable and far more powerful weapons - people should take real notice when there is a tank on the battlefield. Someone has to get through a few thousand EHP to get to you. And they are still fast, because otherwise infantry AV would be a huge problem in relation to intended cost/status of the vehicle. And they have a fast turning turret, because otherwise infantry AV would be a huge problem. And they fire quickly, because otherwise infantry AV would be a huge problem. Etc. In short, the tank is currently filling two roles on the field, and getting all the benefits of both! This is the issue.
In fact, we should have the MAVs, which should serve as infantry support. Capable of doing what tanks do now, but with less EHP, making them more of a shock/point-defense weapon. And given their increased firepower (think two small turrets) and their mobility, they should post a threat to tanks in pairs or combination with even one infantry AV.
And then we should have the HAVs - the genuine heavy hitters, which move slower, fire slower, and have slower turret rotation than they currently do. Capable of driving in with infantry, popping the MAV that was previously slowing everyone down, and making it possible to take the point.
As I put elsewhere:
Quote:And I guess my thought is that the "infantry support" role should be where the MAVs shine (in addition to making HAVs think very hard in groups of 2+). Harder to kill than an LAV, but without the Large turret of the HAV.
And the Large turret of the HAV should be primarily for LAV/MAV/HAV removal, doing little damage and generally being more difficult to use against infantry.
Boom. Vehicles fixed.
That would be "highly mobile armor" for scouting / light infantry support - LAV.
Then "mobile armor" for infantry support / general purpose AV - MAV.
And "heavy armor" for AV / infantry suppression (not total wipe-the-floor destruction) - HAV.
Two LAVs would be fast enough to kill an MAV, two MAVs an HAV, and HAVs would be a serious threat to LAVs, or MAVs, while posing a clear defense of an area to infantry (if the smaller turrets are in use...as is not the case on 80+% of the tanks currently).
--
So the answer to the question? Idiotic tankers should be able to be killed by infantry AV - even soloed. But tanks shouldn't be the immediate threat to infantry - MAVs should. And those should definitely see ADV/Proto AV as a real threat. Right now, tanks are the vehicular equivalent of a Heavy, put into battle because the Assault class is still being worked on. It comes with all that heavy-class CPU/PG and Shield/Armor, but it turns, fires, jumps, sprints like an Assault. It's OP, and it over-fills both its roles as a "killer" and a "heavy hitter". |
Sirys Lyons
Tronhadar Free Guard
Minmatar Republic
26
|
Posted - 2014.01.11 22:40:00 -
[2] - Quote
True Adamance wrote:
That or a redesignation of the role of tanks making them designed to deal with other vehicles on the map at costs to infantry killing power, coupled with making small turrets effective enough to encourage/ make worthwhile for tankers to want an Anti Infantry gunner to cover them.
That's exactly it. Tanks should be primarily AV, but they can't be because there is no MAV. There's just tanks, or buggies. |
Sirys Lyons
Tronhadar Free Guard
Minmatar Republic
26
|
Posted - 2014.01.11 22:46:00 -
[3] - Quote
Atiim wrote:Sirys Lyons wrote:True Adamance wrote:
That or a redesignation of the role of tanks making them designed to deal with other vehicles on the map at costs to infantry killing power, coupled with making small turrets effective enough to encourage/ make worthwhile for tankers to want an Anti Infantry gunner to cover them.
That's exactly it. Tanks should be primarily AV, but they can't be because there is no MAV. There's just tanks, or buggies. If tanks should be the primary answer to other tanks, then why have Infantry AV in the first place?
To kill off LAVs, MAVs (what should be the main anti-infantry threats) and assist in the destruction of HAVs (that may be posing a serious threat to friendly LAVs and MAVs).
The whole ecosystem that the devs have created makes a very nice rochambeau relationship. The problem is that the ecosystem isn't in the game, and tanks are taking on way too much power as a result. |