|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Henri Thoreau
Crux Special Tasks Group
Gallente Federation
26
   |
Posted - 2012.08.13 03:20:00 -
[1] - Quote
I haven't really had an opinion one way or the other on tanks until this last match.
The setup
I have cross-comms bug that allows me to hear and report the tankers movements to my squad the whole match (starting with me alerting the team at the very beginning what we will be facing so they can load out appropriately). We are running with a minimum of a prototype forge and 2x prototype swarms. Enemy has a Sagaris with Large rails and 2x small missiles.
Outcome
Enemy tank survives the entire match, doesn't get a crazy kill count, but is the primary reason the enemy defenders win the game comfortably. Meanwhile, the AV squad suffers a fair number of casualties in direct confrontation with the tank.
Personal observation
Mobility seems to be the key issue with tanks. They can get in and out too quickly, either killing the supposed counter (a coordinated AV team), or at least wrecking havoc and pulling out to return for another run in a relatively short space of time. Either fat suits need to be able to fly to keep up with their quarry, tanks need to be less maneuverable, or tanks need weak spots. The first suggestion is quite silly IMHO, the second seems inappropriate (even modern day tanks are quite fast), the third would seem ideal. The third would make the tanks vulnerable to their most obvious direct counter, a skilled forge gunner. A swarm launcher would be unlikely to get hits on the vulnerable area, if it's relatively small, thus preventing tanks from becoming easy swarmer prey.
As exciting as all of these "nerf tank" threads are I hate to even create another one, and I believe someone else has already suggested the weak spot idea. I felt the need to post this particular case study given the peculiar advantage my squad had in this encounter. Fat suit armor/shield is vulnerable to head shots, why should tank armor also not be vulnerable? |
Henri Thoreau
Crux Special Tasks Group
Gallente Federation
26
|
Posted - 2012.08.13 03:30:00 -
[2] - Quote
Lurchasaurus wrote:just as you have said the mobility is the issue, ewar in the next build will bring to you the awesomeness of stasis webifiers.
I must have managed to missed that in the precursor patch notes....
Hmmm. Just checked again and still don't see mention of them. Are they actually confirmed to be in, or is this just hearsay?
|
Henri Thoreau
Crux Special Tasks Group
Gallente Federation
26
|
Posted - 2012.08.13 04:14:00 -
[3] - Quote
Carilito wrote:Cool report on the soon to be old build lets see the new one and do case studies then
Useful response, Carlito. +1 to you. |
Henri Thoreau
Crux Special Tasks Group
Gallente Federation
26
|
Posted - 2012.08.13 04:23:00 -
[4] - Quote
Lurchasaurus wrote:well, with the addition of ewar, they will absolutely be in at some point. it wouldnt make much sense to add in ewar without webifiers......its like adding in tank but no turrets, doesnt make sense.
anyway, check the thread i made about CCP and tanks and watch the vid. itll answer your question.
Here's a link to the thread I assume you were talking about, so folks can find it. |
Henri Thoreau
Crux Special Tasks Group
Gallente Federation
26
|
Posted - 2012.08.13 04:25:00 -
[5] - Quote
Lurchasaurus wrote:Henri Thoreau wrote:Carilito wrote:Cool report on the soon to be old build lets see the new one and do case studies then Useful response, Carlito. +1 to you. but actually tho, nice post carlito lol
My mistake, Lurch. I actually thought you were a mature poster. |
|
|
| |
|