| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Operative 1171 Aajli
Bragian Order
Amarr Empire
2037
   |
Posted - 2014.09.17 01:26:00 -
[1] - Quote
Ok, finally, here it is GÇô my idea for improving tanks vs. AV. I can't say I have explained it as well as I'm thinking about it and I have to be wordier than I like to be. This is just a springboard for discussion.
I wanted to post this in General for exposure, but I guess it will get moved to the Ideas forum.
Ultimately, this is realistically meant for Legion I suppose. For DUST this is now just a pipe dream.
TL;DR
If Bob is a big ol' strong man, Lewis is a skinny, short little dwarf and I throw a handful of peanuts at them what do you think will happen?
Bob is big but lumbering with short arms. Lewis is small but can throw them peanuts hard and far at d*ck height.
Then there is Betty. If Betty is wearing some armor, is about 5'4GÇ¥ and has a frying pan wouldn't you say she has a fair chance against both Bob and Lewis?
Now imagine all the ants on the ground have swarm launchers.
-
The ultimate goal of this idea is to prevent what happened with the vehicle rebalance where militia tank mods were as good as regular mods and militia blasters were very effective against infantry and just as good as higher tiered turrets.
The following idea would regulate tank use by preventing new tankers and non-tankers who want to pull out a tank as a quick fix with little investment in sp to dominate infantry while still allowing a decent engagement with a player that has more sp investment in tanks.
The invested tanker is meant to have a better advantage over infantry at the cost of sp investment, but be evenly matched against another tanker. How you equip the tank (offensive or defensive and types of mods) would therefore dictate the engagement.
-
Tanks have to be balanced against two things, AV and other tanks. There are already elements in the game for doing this; they are called dispersion, rate of fire and range.
Combine dispersion of large turret fire along with damage, range and rate of fire with a higher contrast between offensive and defensive capabilities and you can have balance against two very different elements of the game.
To balance against AV, tanks should either be geared for offense or defense. This means that if you mount a proto turret you likewise, even with fitting skills all the way up, can only fit basic modules. If you want a defensive tank then you fit complex modules, but can only fit a standard turret.
That leaves the problem of the in-between tank, the advanced tank. This tank would be a little of both, with advanced turret and enhanced modules. However, the advanced/enhanced items would not be half way in power between standard and proto (basic and complex). The middle powered tank would be closer to a basic tank with slight improvements. The proto tank would be much better than the advanced in terms of damage, but worse with defense.
Now, with the proto tank with basic mods you have a tank that a solo infantry can destroy with ease. It is a glass cannon. On the other hand, the defensive tank requires coordinated effort, but does not have the offensive capability to cause infantry much pain.
Turret dispersion and range will be the balancing factor against infantry. Instead of the standard, advanced and proto turrets we have now, let's go back to variations of turrets. The present standard turrets would have a large dispersion area they can hit and be close range only with a slow rate of fire or low damage. The present proto turrets would have the longer range and tighter dispersion.
How will this help with tank vs. tank though? Why would I choose an advanced tank? How is a glass cannon tank against infantry not a glass cannon against a tank? Dispersion and range of turrets plus the fact that an offensive tank and a defensive tank are at opposite ends of the spectrum in their capabilities naturally allows that fight to be balanced.
For example, a standard blaster would be much like what we have now. It is for CQ and ok against infantry, but with a big dispersion. It is better at a bit greater range against a larger target like a tank. The proto blaster is better against infantry in CQ but still suffers from a certain amount of dispersion so it can not hit infantry too well at a range though it would be able to deal with another tank. Remember, this proto turret tank is a glass cannon when it comes to infantry, but would be evenly matched with another tank.
As another example, a rail turret would be about 100m and a bit more damage with a slower rate of fire for the standard, 150m and same damage and slightly higher rate of fire at advanced and the proto rail would have 300m with higher rate of fire, but less damage than standard. Therefore, the standard turret tank, which is a defensive tank can take on the proto tank equally, but can't shoot at infantry as efficiently. The proto turret glass cannon tank can hit infantry better at range with higher RoF and can also take on the standard turret defensive tank with the higher RoF, but less damage evening out the tank fight.
The offensive tank puts out a lot of damage, but against a lot of defense. The defensive tank puts out little damage but against little defense. The advanced tank is only slightly better than the complex modded defensive tank and would have the best chance either way against the basic and proto equipped tanks while being more vulnerable to AV.
High dispersion with the standard turret is going to be better against a larger target like a tank so would hit completely at close range. This is where the defensive tank fights due to small range of the standard turret. The proto turret tank fights at a greater distance and hits with the tighter dispersion.
Ranges would be relative to the type of turret so wouldn't be that much of a contrast for tank vs. tank when dealing with speed and maneuverability. It could mean a big difference when dealing with infantry which has a better opportunity for maneuvering and hiding in cover.
Brick tanking a scout suit since April 2013!
|
True Adamance
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
13313
|
Posted - 2014.09.17 01:38:00 -
[2] - Quote
Eh...... probably makes sense......
But Tanks don't functions like tanks should. No tank carries powerful ordinance requiring the HAV to stop, aim, fire. No powerful recoil, no HAV mass, nothing....
Tanks need a fundamental redesign.
"We were commanded to burn the system...We did. I mourn the loss of the innocents caught in our fires" -Kador Ouryon
|
ACT1ON BASTARD
Amarr Templars
Amarr Empire
152
|
Posted - 2014.09.17 02:11:00 -
[3] - Quote
Ive been saying this forever, you shouldnt be able to tank wo sp in tanking. Dropships and lavs are fine since theyre mostly used for transport. Thats why we had so much op tank spam around 1.7, and thats why we have crap tanks now, because ccp balanced around that militia tank spam everyone hated. Militia tanks should of never existed, end of story. |
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui
Kyoudai Furinkazan
1193
|
Posted - 2014.09.17 02:17:00 -
[4] - Quote
True Adamance wrote:Eh...... probably makes sense......
But Tanks don't functions like tanks should. No tank carries powerful ordinance requiring the HAV to stop, aim, fire. No powerful recoil, no HAV mass, nothing....
Tanks need a fundamental redesign.
What you spoke of wasn't always the problem and actually became about after the " redesigning " more or less .
I for one was a fan of the old turrets and the variety and purposes that each design had .
The turrets were the most balanced part besides the rails having 600 m coverage with maps that are not that wide to create a balanced effect .
The LLAV's were kinda OP due to that resistance bonus but if they would have turned that down a bit and had the concept of anti-vehicle weapons now , it might have been a better experience then more or less .
To me anti-vehicle and vehicle balance is close and it depends on the direction that the next tier and afterwards in vehicles , that will tell it all .
There will always be rumblings of discomfort in this community and to me that throws off the process but if we as a whole can get some positive and useful feedback with the implementation of the next level , this will be a good lesson and experience .
Delta should come with a SP or infantry SP refund so that a campaign for one is not needed .
|
Fizzer XCIV
Company of Marcher Lords
Amarr Empire
276
|
Posted - 2014.09.17 02:29:00 -
[5] - Quote
I don't think you know what TL;DR means... |
True Adamance
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
13313
|
Posted - 2014.09.17 02:31:00 -
[6] - Quote
Eh.... I know this isn't really relevant..... but hell if I can't dunk an enemy tank, in a game reliably, at at least 500m something is wrong. Probably why Warthunder Ground Forces is simply more enjoyable.
"We were commanded to burn the system...We did. I mourn the loss of the innocents caught in our fires" -Kador Ouryon
|
Operative 1171 Aajli
Bragian Order
Amarr Empire
2040
|
Posted - 2014.09.17 02:32:00 -
[7] - Quote
Fizzer XCIV wrote:I don't think you know what TL;DR means...
I don't think you understood which part was the TL;DR part. Look for the hyphened separations.
Brick tanking a scout suit since April 2013!
|
UjustGot JAMMED
Algintal Core
Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2014.09.17 21:23:00 -
[8] - Quote
Good read. |
Apothecary Za'ki
Biomass Positive
915
|
Posted - 2014.09.17 21:51:00 -
[9] - Quote
Operative 1171 Aajli wrote:removed wall of text.
basically i feel once delta hits and swarms get their buff, HAVs get their inertia nerf and the overdrive gets a bit of a nerf too.. normal dropships get an EHP buff and i think there was going to be a nerf to afterburners on ADS too..
after all this i feel AV vs Vehicles will be fair and balanced and we may be at the point were ccp can experiment with bringing back the old vehicles and then setting to work on balancing them too..
as we have basically balanced Standard vehicles vs all meta range of AV weaponry (excluding proximity mines as they suck balls) i feel ccp could re introduce "specialist" vehicles and normal vehicles up to advanced level and set to work on balancing them with some data mining and feedback.
[[LogiBro in Training]]
Level 1 Forum Pariah
What ever happened to buffing Logi eHP in Delta?!
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |