DUST Search - titan tank

4447 wrote:

Alaric Rhys wrote:

4447 wrote:

in natural progression in any weapon we will always see a bigger, better weapon in the future. taking this on broad a titan/ heavy tank killer should be that progression.

Not necessarily. The Tiger 1 was a real beast during WW2, yet the M1A1 Abrams has a much lower profile and is easily twice as 'powerful'. The larger something is, the easier it is to hit. Having a massive tank looks cool, and it's certainly imposing, but everyone near it will be able to hit it. It's size will mean it has many blind spots where attackers can fire on it with impunity, and it might even be possible for infantry to swarm over it. Aircraft would have a much easier time bombing it, and the orbital strikes could take it out in one go.

The bigger and better saying, i know sometimes bigger isn't better but i know weapons get better. the M4A1 is lower profile is i think gives it better speed. tanks because there's no major war going with super nation against each other there's no need for a tank killer.

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
4447 ZionTCD Legacy Rising 649	Posted - 2012.07.17 15:39:00 - [1] - Quote hopefully we will see a tank that resembles the attributes of a titan class ship. i just can't seem to image the the weight of this tank or the damage it would do. one thing a titan tank should be able to do is take eve ships out the sky. the image of a titan tank should have four tank tracks, with it's sub weapons being normal tank turrets on the game and it's main weapon should four times the size of a normal tank turret. i really want to see a titan tank.
Superluminal Replicant 40	Posted - 2012.07.17 15:42:00 - [2] - Quote As long as they add militia versions to.
4447 ZionTCD Legacy Rising 649	Posted - 2012.07.17 15:48:00 - [3] - Quote Superluminal Replicant wrote: As long as they add militia versions to. why?
Angely Unomahar Algintal Core Gallente Federation 4	Posted - 2012.07.17 15:50:00 - [4] - Quote 4447 wrote: Superluminal Replicant wrote: As long as they add militia versions to. why? the same .... why ??? titan tank, if there's some, will need lot of skill (I hope) and if they are militia, we'll be in game with 5 titans (like i've seen with actual HAV ! )
4447 ZionTCD Legacy Rising 649	Posted - 2012.07.17 15:54:00 - [5] - Quote Angely Unomahar wrote: 4447 wrote: Superluminal Replicant wrote: As long as they add militia versions to. why? the same .... why ??? titan tank, if there's some, will need lot of skill (I hope) and if they are militia, we'll be in game with 5 titans (like i've seen with actual HAV ! ) a lot of skill and money to build a titan tank.
STB-stlcarlos989 EV Circle of Huskarl Minmatar Republic 936	Posted - 2012.07.17 16:06:00 - [6] - Quote 4447 wrote: Angely Unomahar wrote: 4447 wrote: Superluminal Replicant wrote: As long as they add militia versions to. why? the same .... why ??? titan tank, if there's some, will need lot of skill (I hope) and if they are militia, we'll be in game with 5 titans (like i've seen with actual HAV ! ) a lot of skill and money to build a titan tank. Seriously this is an FPS after all, if you guys love tanks so much why don't you guys go play world of tanks.
Garrett Blacknova Codex Troopers 1849	Posted - 2012.07.17 16:11:00 - [7] - Quote Surya and Sagaris tank builds are pretty much the equivalent of Titans.
4447 ZionTCD Legacy Rising 649	Posted - 2012.07.17 16:14:00 - [8] - Quote i play as a assault class . i think if the you had a titan tank and you were losing it could be a game changer,an a moral boost for the team. this moral boost you will feel more apart of the eve universe thus giving emotion to the game. anyway titan tanks are not on world of tanks.
4447 ZionTCD Legacy Rising 649	Posted - 2012.07.17 16:17:00 - [9] - Quote Garrett Blacknova wrote: Surya and Sagaris tank builds are pretty much the equivalent of Titans. you could call them equivalent to titans but i think i heard that mechs are going to be introduce into the game.
Garrett Blacknova Codex Troopers 1849	Posted - 2012.07.17 16:29:00 - [10] - Quote 4447 wrote: Garrett Blacknova wrote: Surya and Sagaris tank builds are pretty much the equivalent of Titans. you could call them equivalent to titans but i think i heard that mechs are going to be introduce into the game. From what we've seen and heard, I doubt they'll be larger than Marauders. I think they'll have more of a mobility advantage than a tanking one.

4447 ZionTCD Legacy Rising 649	Posted - 2012.07.17 17:01:00 - [11] - Quote your most probably right, but i think CCP would have to do a variant that is a heavy.
Noc Tempre Imperfects Negative-Feedback 1170	Posted - 2012.07.17 17:11:00 - [12] - Quote http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landkreuzer_P._1500_Monster This? In DUST? Would be lol-tastic. Only place I've ever seen superheavy vehicles work is 40k, and everything there is run by nightmare fuel and rule of cool. Completely different vibe.
4447 ZionTCD Legacy Rising 649	Posted - 2012.07.17 17:18:00 - [13] - Quote Noc Tempre wrote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landkreuzer_P._1500_Monster This? In DUST? Would be lol-tastic. Only place I've ever seen superheavy vehicles work is 40k, and everything there is run by nightmare fuel and rule of cool. Completely different vibe. 1000 ton tank, most of them super heavy tanks are under 100 tons.
Angely Unomahar Algintal Core Gallente Federation 4	Posted - 2012.07.17 17:19:00 - [14] - Quote STB-stlcarlos989 EV wrote: 4447 wrote: Angely Unomahar wrote: 4447 wrote: Superluminal Replicant wrote: As long as they add militia versions to. why? the same .... why ??? titan tank, if there's some, will need lot of skill (I hope) and if they are militia, we'll be in game with 5 titans (like i've seen with actual HAV ! ) a lot of skill and money to build a titan tank. Seriously this is an FPS after all, if you guys love tanks so much why don't you guys go play world of tanks. for me it's not about play with tank (i love my dropsuit assault a-series !! ) just want see a big war !!!!!! i just don't want to see noob play with a titan like u can with a soma (i love kill them with my AV grenade ) ! (in the skirmish map of the first beta closed version, for who remember, a titan coul'd be cool ! )
Noc Tempre Imperfects Negative-Feedback 1170	Posted - 2012.07.17 17:23:00 - [15] - Quote 4447 wrote: Noc Tempre wrote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landkreuzer_P._1500_Monster This? In DUST? Would be lol-tastic. Only place I've ever seen superheavy vehicles work is 40k, and everything there is run by nightmare fuel and rule of cool. Completely different vibe. 1000 ton tank, most of them super heavy tanks are under 100 tons. You are talking about a block-sized tank (where current large cannons are the "small" turrets). HAVs are already in the 100 ton range easily.
4447 ZionTCD Legacy Rising 649	Posted - 2012.07.17 17:34:00 - [16] - Quote Noc Tempre wrote: 4447 wrote: Noc Tempre wrote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landkreuzer_P._1500_Monster This? In DUST? Would be lol-tastic. Only place I've ever seen superheavy vehicles work is 40k, and everything there is run by nightmare fuel and rule of cool. Completely different vibe. 1000 ton tank, most of them super heavy tanks are under 100 tons. You are talking about a block-sized tank (where current large cannons are the "small" turrets). HAVs are already in the 100 ton range easily. a titan would be a monster looking at wiki most of the weight is in the turret meaning a titan class tank would be over 3000 tons i think?
Noc Tempre Imperfects Negative-Feedback 1170	Posted - 2012.07.17 17:41:00 - [17] - Quote What would the point be again? It would be completely useless at ground warfare and too thinly armored compared to a structure for oribital defense.
crazy space ZionTCD Legacy Rising 879	Posted - 2012.07.17 17:53:00 - [18] - Quote titans are going to be gaint trains, supply trucks over 80 feet high. check out the eve art book
4447 ZionTCD Legacy Rising 649	Posted - 2012.07.17 18:07:00 - [19] - Quote got me thinking now...the role of a tank is to break an enemies defence line. a titan tank being 3000 ton with orbital bombardment would seen as a sitting target it would be used more as a artillery unit. if we shrink a titan tank to have three turrets but being the same size as a HAV main turret. the role of the a titan tank becomes a role of a tank killer or a super tank killer. the titan tank would have more armour and 2x slower then a HAV just to balance it out. now the problem with 3 turrets the same size, dependent on the size of this titan class base. would see the two side turrets a minus angel of movement giving it one of it's weakness just like some of the tank killers in WW2. with this weakness i would put two with sub turrets like on a HAV to cover the back on the tank but this would still be it's weakness. what do you think.
Noc Tempre Imperfects Negative-Feedback 1170	Posted - 2012.07.17 18:10:00 - [20] - Quote Siege mode marauders. There is your anti-tank tank. I'm not even sure what you want anymore other than an I-Win button.

EnIgMa99 Imperfects Negative-Feedback 219	Posted - 2012.07.17 18:10:00 - [21] - Quote Noc Tempre wrote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landkreuzer_P._1500_Monster This? In DUST? Would be lol-tastic. Only place I've ever seen superheavy vehicles work is 40k, and everything there is run by nightmare fuel and rule of cool. Completely different vibe. it would be less of an gun game vs a vehicle game
Roccano1 152	Posted - 2012.07.17 18:12:00 - [22] - Quote 4447 wrote: hopefully we will see a tank that resembles the attributes of a titan class ship. i just can't seem to image the the weight of this tank or the damage it would do. one thing a titan tank should be able to do is take eve ships out the sky. the image of a titan tank should have four tank tracks, with it's sub weapons being normal tank turrets on the game and it's main weapon should four times the size of a normal tank turret. i really want to see a titan tank. Too bad a titan isnt meant for DPS. It only really has one major weapon and thats the doomsday, and you have to wait a few minutes before you are able to fire it after the first time. Its more meant for support, like an oversized command ship with a jump bridge on it.
Alaric Rhys Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation 6	Posted - 2012.07.17 18:18:00 - [23] - Quote Rather than super-heavy vehicles, I'd like to see some specialized vehicles in the finished game. As others have already pointed out, massive super-heavy vehicles would be too much of a liability with the air-support and orbital strike. They'd be large, slow-moving targets that would get nickle-and-dimed to death or just outright destroyed by some well-placed ordinance. Specialty-vehicles, on the other hand, could add a lot to the game tactically and gameplay-wise. Examples would be a dedicated anti-aircraft tank with multiple MGs, or tank killers like the self-propelled guns (think some of the more unusual designs from WW2, like the Marder).
4447 ZionTCD Legacy Rising 649	Posted - 2012.07.17 18:42:00 - [24] - Quote in natural progression in any weapon we will always see a bigger, better weapon in the future. taking this on broad a titan/ heavy tank killer should be that progression.
Garrett Blacknova Codex Troopers 1849	Posted - 2012.07.17 18:59:00 - [25] - Quote 4447 wrote: your most probably right, but i think CCP would have to do a variant that is a heavy. I think you're working backwards. They should have a Scout variant. The normal MTAC will be the Heavy.
4447 ZionTCD Legacy Rising 649	Posted - 2012.07.17 19:06:00 - [26] - Quote backwards, forwards we get there tho
Alaric Rhys Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation 6	Posted - 2012.07.17 19:17:00 - [27] - Quote 4447 wrote: in natural progression in any weapon we will always see a bigger, better weapon in the future. taking this on broad a titan/ heavy tank killer should be that progression. Not necessarily. The Tiger 1 was a real beast during WW2, yet the M1A1 Abrams has a much lower profile and is easily twice as 'powerful'. The larger something is, the easier it is to hit. Having a massive tank looks cool, and it's certainly imposing, but everyone near it will be able to hit it. It's size will mean it has many blind spots where attackers can fire on it with impunity, and it might even be possible for infantry to swarm over it. Aircraft would have a much easier time bombing it, and the orbital strikes could take it out in one go.
Ten-Sidhe Osmon Surveillance Caldari State 414	Posted - 2012.07.17 19:27:00 - [28] - Quote I think the mcc would fill the titan role. It will one day be player controlled.
4447 ZionTCD Legacy Rising 649	Posted - 2012.07.17 19:36:00 - [29] - Quote Alaric Rhys wrote: 4447 wrote: in natural progression in any weapon we will always see a bigger, better weapon in the future. taking this on broad a titan/ heavy tank killer should be that progression. Not necessarily. The Tiger 1 was a real beast during WW2, yet the M1A1 Abrams has a much lower profile and is easily twice as 'powerful'. The larger something is, the easier it is to hit. Having a massive tank looks cool, and it's certainly imposing, but everyone near it will be able to hit it. It's size will mean it has many blind spots where attackers can fire on it with impunity, and it might even be possible for infantry to swarm over it. Aircraft would have a much easier time bombing it, and the orbital strikes could take it out in one go. The bigger and better saying, i know sometimes bigger isn't better but i know weapons get better. the M4A1 is lower profile is i think gives it better speed. tanks because there's no major war going with super nation against each other there's no need for a tank killer.
Alaric Rhys Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation 6	Posted - 2012.07.17 20:04:00 - [30] - Quote 4447 wrote: Alaric Rhys wrote: 4447 wrote: in natural progression in any weapon we will always see a bigger, better weapon in the future. taking this on broad a titan/ heavy tank killer should be that progression. Not necessarily. The Tiger 1 was a real beast during WW2, yet the M1A1 Abrams has a much lower profile and is easily twice as 'powerful'. The larger something is, the easier it is to hit. Having a massive tank looks cool, and it's certainly imposing, but everyone near it will be able to hit it. It's size will mean it has many blind spots where attackers can fire on it with impunity, and it might even be possible for infantry to swarm over it. Aircraft would have a much easier time bombing it, and the orbital strikes could take it out in one go. The bigger and better saying, i know sometimes bigger isn't better but i know weapons get better. the M4A1 is lower profile is i think gives it better speed. tanks because there's no major war going with super nation against each other there's no need for a tank killer. It's not a matter of better speed (though speed counts). The lower profile is a defensive design; the lower the tanks is to the ground, the more easily it can hide and the harder it is to hit. As I said, a larger vehicle is more visible, and thus easier to hit/destroy. Older tanks tend to be larger because we didn't have the tech to make them any smaller without sacrificing power. Also, never discount the effectiveness of infantry swarming a large, slow moving vehicle. During the Soviet invasion of Finland the Russians lost approximately 3,500 tanks, mostly to infantry armed with little more than simple explosives. Tanks are not self-reliant; they require infantry support to be effective. The bigger the tank, the more support it requires. For Dust, this would mean you'd probably have 6 or more people just to full utilize everything the super-heavy has to offer, but that would leave few infantry to support it. Meaning the enemy could pick it apart as long as they worked as a team. Also, M4-A1= carbine/assault rifle. M1-A1= tank. Huge difference.



Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page