DUST Search - [Proposal] Tank Balance

Severus Smith wrote:

Background
There is a current imbalance on the battlefield. Tanks (current HAV's) can lay down serious damage, can redeploy rapidly across the battlefield, and are perfect for assaulting positions. They are the vehicle version of the Assault dropsuit. As such, unlike the Assault dropsuit they are lacking the Heavy element that is their counter. Current tanks have no hard counter. They destroy Installation turrets quickly, can mow down AV infantry with ease, and can run away from / heal through serious damage.

Proposal
Reclassify our current tanks as MAV's (Medium Assault Vehicles) and add proper Heavy Tanks (like this, this or this). Heavy Tanks would be extremely armored, slow, and have a single main turret that deals 2x damage (double guns). It has no side turrets. It is built to destroy enemy vehicles and installations. Due to it's slow speed, big size, slow turret speed, and large weapons it would be inefficient at killing individual infantry (like how modern heavy armor doesn't waste shells firing at a single enemy soldier).

Benefits
- This provides a hard counter to current tanks. Did the enemy just call in 3x MAV's, we spawn one HAV to take them out.

- This benefits vehicle drivers. You get a new f***ing awesome vehicle.

- This fits into New Eden balance. Like EVE, there is always something bigger. But the bigger things can't roflstomp the tiny things because the big guns can't hit them well.

- This makes AV more realistic. Yes, 3500 damage from a swarm launcher will one shot a 2000 HP LAV and hurt a 8000 HP MAV. But that'll barely scratch a 32,000 HP HAV. Your gonna need some bigger guns...

- Forces vehicle support. Heavy Tanks excel against Medium Tanks and installations, but suck against light vehicles and infantry. Medium Tanks excel against light vehicles and infantry, and suck against Heavy Tanks and installations. Both must work together to counter the others weaknesses.

- Remote explosives users have a new, slow moving target.

Pages: 1 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Severus Smith ZionTCD Legacy Rising 170	Posted - 2013.03.01 19:08:00 - [1] - Quote Background There is a current imbalance on the battlefield. Tanks (current HAV's) can lay down serious damage, can redeploy rapidly across the battlefield, and are perfect for assaulting positions. They are the vehicle version of the Assault dropsuit. As such, unlike the Assault dropsuit they are lacking the Heavy element that is their counter. Current tanks have no hard counter. They destroy Installation turrets quickly, can mow down AV infantry with ease, and can run away from / heal through serious damage. Proposal Reclassify our current tanks as MAV's (Medium Assault Vehicles) and add proper Heavy Tanks (like this, this or this). Heavy Tanks would be extremely armored, slow, and have a single main turret that deals 2x damage (double guns). It has no side turrets. It is built to destroy enemy vehicles and installations. Due to it's slow speed, big size, slow turret speed, and large weapons it would be inefficient at killing individual infantry (like how modern heavy armor doesn't waste shells firing at a single enemy soldier). Benefits - This provides a hard counter to current tanks. Did the enemy just call in 3x MAV's, we spawn one HAV to take them out. - This benefits vehicle drivers. You get a new f***ing awesome vehicle. - This fits into New Eden balance. Like EVE, there is always something bigger. But the bigger things can't roflstomp the tiny things because the big guns can't hit them well. - This makes AV more realistic. Yes, 3500 damage from a swarm launcher will one shot a 2000 HP LAV and hurt a 8000 HP MAV. But that'll barely scratch a 32,000 HP HAV. Your gonna need some bigger guns... - Forces vehicle support. Heavy Tanks excel against Medium Tanks and installations, but suck against light vehicles and infantry. Medium Tanks excel against light vehicles and infantry, and suck against Heavy Tanks and installations. Both must work together to counter the others weaknesses. - Remote explosives users have a new, slow moving target.
Necrodermis GunFall Mobilization Covert Intervention 469	Posted - 2013.03.01 19:18:00 - [2] - Quote Severus Smith wrote: Background There is a current imbalance on the battlefield. Tanks (current HAV's) can lay down serious damage, can redeploy rapidly across the battlefield, and are perfect for assaulting positions. They are the vehicle version of the Assault dropsuit. As such, unlike the Assault dropsuit they are lacking the Heavy element that is their counter. Current tanks have no hard counter. They destroy Installation turrets quickly, can mow down AV infantry with ease, and can run away from / heal through serious damage. they do have hard counters. they have a ton of hard counters. packed AV nades will mess even a hardened tank and all iit takes is two levels in grenades. a group of AV will either make the tank flee with a bit of health or decimate it. a group of skilled up AV will destroy the tank and it's a fraction of the cost in both isk and skill points. just a small deviation from the normal to level up swarm launchers or grenades.
Takahiro Kashuken Intara Direct Action Caldari State 119	Posted - 2013.03.01 19:25:00 - [3] - Quote Necrodermis wrote: Severus Smith wrote: Background There is a current imbalance on the battlefield. Tanks (current HAV's) can lay down serious damage, can redeploy rapidly across the battlefield, and are perfect for assaulting positions. They are the vehicle version of the Assault dropsuit. As such, unlike the Assault dropsuit they are lacking the Heavy element that is their counter. Current tanks have no hard counter. They destroy Installation turrets quickly, can mow down AV infantry with ease, and can run away from / heal through serious damage. they do have hard counters. they have a ton of hard counters. packed AV nades will mess even a hardened tank and all iit takes is two levels in grenades. a group of AV will either make the tank flee with a bit of health or decimate it. a group of skilled up AV will destroy the tank and it's a fraction of the cost in both isk and skill points. just a small deviation from the normal to level up swarm launchers or grenades. I think he means hard counter as real ******* hard not a solo guy with packed AV nades and a milita swarm These types of tank would require ppl with the proto AV and all 4 of them using it and maybe a couple of MAvs to boot with an OB on top Current HAVs are weak hence the renaming to MAVs and the introduction of a new vehicle
Bojo The Mighty Bojo's School of the Trades 461	Posted - 2013.03.01 19:28:00 - [4] - Quote Go to Market > Vehicles > HAVs > Madrugar or Surya> Variations On the list will be CreoDron Breach Surya...it could possibly be a more tanked HAV.
Necrodermis GunFall Mobilization Covert Intervention 469	Posted - 2013.03.01 19:32:00 - [5] - Quote Takahiro Kashuken wrote: I think he means hard counter as real ******* hard not a solo guy with packed AV nades and a milita swarm These types of tank would require ppl with the proto AV and all 4 of them using it and maybe a couple of MAvs to boot with an OB on top Current HAVs are weak hence the renaming to MAVs and the introduction of a new vehicle that doesn't make any sense. you are just bringing in a new device to out do another. and then that one tank will dominate the field. what is the plan after that? bring in another bigger tank to eat it? all you idiots want is a one shot kill for everything. if it takes more than one shot than obviously you don't like it. i would be complaining too, if this game was a modern shooter. which it isn't, it's very far from it. this thing doesn't even have a catagory and it is actually hurting itself because of it. but general garbage aside wanting a gorilla to kill all the baboons isn't the way to go.
Severus Smith ZionTCD Legacy Rising 170	Posted - 2013.03.01 19:35:00 - [6] - Quote Takahiro Kashuken wrote: I think he means hard counter as real ***** hard not a solo guy with packed AV nades and a milita swarm These types of tank would require ppl with the proto AV and all 4 of them using it and maybe a couple of MAvs to boot with an OB on top Current HAVs are weak hence the renaming to MAVs and the introduction of a new vehicle This. The HMG Heavy is the supposed "hard counter" to Assault suits, since it can eat them up in seconds with little effort. Same with Shotty scouts to Heavies. Eats them in seconds. (All of this in perfect 1v1 scenarios) A group of 4 AV players working together to kill our current tanks is not a hard counter. I want a real Heavy Tank. That way when a MAV driver sees it he goes "Oh s" just like an Assault player looking down the barrel of an HMG. Our current AV is wonky. Militia does so much damage because the weapons are flat and they are the only counter to tanks. If you add a heavy tank that shreds other tanks but isn't a huge* threat to infantry then AV damage can do down or MAV HP can go up to compensate. The new model becomes Infantry (killed by) Medium Tanks (killed by) Heavy Tanks (killed by) squad of AV Infantry Which is like EVE: Frigates (killed by) Cruisers (killed by) Battlecruisers (killed by) fleet of Frigates
Kwik Draw Traitors Function 4	Posted - 2013.03.01 19:43:00 - [7] - Quote choose scissors... it always beats paper.
Necrodermis GunFall Mobilization Covert Intervention 469	Posted - 2013.03.01 19:53:00 - [8] - Quote Kwik Draw wrote: choose scissors... it always beats paper. that is why everyone has heavy suits. why bother with garbage if you can just mow through everyone and as a bonus you can just pick up the forge gun and send the tank packing when it shows up.
Severus Smith ZionTCD Legacy Rising 170	Posted - 2013.03.01 19:53:00 - [9] - Quote And rock destroys scissors. Only difference in this case is that it takes several papers to beat rock. But still, rock can't do much to stop paper.
Vermaak Doe SVER True Blood Unclaimed. 429	Posted - 2013.03.01 20:45:00 - [10] - Quote Why screw up a working system?

Bruce3 Wayne3 Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS. 16	Posted - 2013.03.01 23:13:00 - [11] - Quote Severus Smith wrote: Background There is a current imbalance on the battlefield. Tanks (current HAV's) can lay down serious damage, can redeploy rapidly across the battlefield, and are perfect for assaulting positions. They are the vehicle version of the Assault dropsuit. As such, unlike the Assault dropsuit they are lacking the Heavy element that is their counter. Current tanks have no hard counter. They destroy Installation turrets quickly, can mow down AV infantry with ease, and can run away from / heal through serious damage. Proposal Reclassify our current tanks as MAV's (Medium Assault Vehicles) and add proper Heavy Tanks (like this, this or this). Heavy Tanks would be extremely armored, slow, and have a single main turret that deals 2x damage (double guns). It has no side turrets. It is built to destroy enemy vehicles and installations. Due to it's slow speed, big size, slow turret speed, and large weapons it would be inefficient at killing individual infantry (like how modern heavy armor doesn't waste shells firing at a single enemy soldier). Benefits - This provides a hard counter to current tanks. Did the enemy just call in 3x MAV's, we spawn one HAV to take them out. - This benefits vehicle drivers. You get a new f***ing awesome vehicle. - This fits into New Eden balance. Like EVE, there is always something bigger. But the bigger things can't roflstomp the tiny things because the big guns can't hit them well. - This makes AV more realistic. Yes, 3500 damage from a swarm launcher will one shot a 2000 HP LAV and hurt a 8000 HP MAV. But that'll barely scratch a 32,000 HP HAV. Your gonna need some bigger guns... - Forces vehicle support. Heavy Tanks excel against Medium Tanks and installations, but suck against light vehicles and infantry. Medium Tanks excel against light vehicles and infantry, and suck against Heavy Tanks and installations. Both must work together to counter the others weaknesses. - Remote explosives users have a new, slow moving target. so your proposing giving tankers more firepower and HP for reduced speed? where do i get my SUPER HEAVY TANK? afterall it would mean 2 of these on 1 team guarantees victory and survival of vehicle. this really is a dumb post as is most other tank related posts since theyre mostly created due to people rage quitting games since their Gek and stacked complex dmg mods cant hurt something that kills them quick
Y0UR NAME HERE Imperfects Negative-Feedback 465	Posted - 2013.03.02 00:18:00 - [12] - Quote Severus Smith wrote: Background There is a current imbalance on the battlefield. Tanks (current HAV's) can lay down serious damage, can redeploy rapidly across the battlefield, and are perfect for assaulting positions. They are the vehicle version of the Assault dropsuit. As such, unlike the Assault dropsuit they are lacking the Heavy element that is their counter. Current tanks have no hard counter. They destroy Installation turrets quickly, can mow down AV infantry with ease, and can run away from / heal through serious damage. Proposal Reclassify our current tanks as MAV's (Medium Assault Vehicles) and add proper Heavy Tanks (like this, this or this). Heavy Tanks would be extremely armored, slow, and have a single main turret that deals 2x damage (double guns). It has no side turrets. It is built to destroy enemy vehicles and installations. Due to it's slow speed, big size, slow turret speed, and large weapons it would be inefficient at killing individual infantry (like how modern heavy armor doesn't waste shells firing at a single enemy soldier). Benefits - This provides a hard counter to current tanks. Did the enemy just call in 3x MAV's, we spawn one HAV to take them out. - This benefits vehicle drivers. You get a new f***ing awesome vehicle. - This fits into New Eden balance. Like EVE, there is always something bigger. But the bigger things can't roflstomp the tiny things because the big guns can't hit them well. - This makes AV more realistic. Yes, 3500 damage from a swarm launcher will one shot a 2000 HP LAV and hurt a 8000 HP MAV. But that'll barely scratch a 32,000 HP HAV. Your gonna need some bigger guns... - Forces vehicle support. Heavy Tanks excel against Medium Tanks and installations, but suck against light vehicles and infantry. Medium Tanks excel against light vehicles and infantry, and suck against Heavy Tanks and installations. Both must work together to counter the others weaknesses. - Remote explosives users have a new, slow moving target. +1 for the thoughts and ideas laid out, But, tanks have hard counters, with proper AV sp and tactics a very well fit tank, like mine, Can be solo'd via Av grenades and then 1 advanced swarm shot. If your having a hard time killing a tank, Isn't it possible he's just a really good tank driver? My brother goes 50/1 with his AR, So does that make him to OP with no counters simply because he can munch infantry and vehicles? Again +1 for effort, I just have to disagree.
Chances Ghost Prototype Technology Corp. 12	Posted - 2013.03.02 00:22:00 - [13] - Quote we DO already have a hard counter to tanks, its called my railgun gunnlogi, and it eats tanks/LAV's and RDV's for breakfast but is rather hard to kill infantry with. What your asking for is already in the game
Jathniel G I A N T 51	Posted - 2013.03.02 00:30:00 - [14] - Quote I like your idea OP. I really do. I don't however think you need a new class of tanks to pull it off though. Simply adding those illustrated options to currently existing tanks would be great, and I'm sure tank users would agree. Swap out the 80 GJ Blaster, for a quad-barrel autocannon (cutting heat build-up by 75%). Or, swap out a basic railgun, for a double-barrel railgun with alternate firing modes (double fire, or alternating single-fire). Again, great idea. It would make tank vs. tank combat far more varied, but you really don't need a new class of tank for it.
Y0UR NAME HERE Imperfects Negative-Feedback 467	Posted - 2013.03.02 00:44:00 - [15] - Quote Jathniel wrote: I like your idea OP. I really do. I don't however think you need a new class of tanks to pull it off though. Simply adding those illustrated options to currently existing tanks would be great, and I'm sure tank users would agree. Swap out the 80 GJ Blaster, for a quad-barrel autocannon (cutting heat build-up by 75%). Or, swap out a basic railgun, for a double-barrel railgun with alternate firing modes (double fire, or alternating single-fire). Again, great idea. It would make tank vs. tank combat far more varied, but you really don't need a new class of tank for it. This I like, but rail would need a splash buff. Current rail of course
Pent'noir Algintal Core Gallente Federation 65	Posted - 2013.03.02 03:29:00 - [16] - Quote I really don't mind having more vehicles, but isnt this already the function of the fittings. You can have your speedy nanofiber fit or a slow armor buffer fit. I'd imagine that ccp would make another proto level tank with some built in features. However, i'm guessing you want a super tank. I can't say yet if they should be buffed yet or not. I don't have much sp and neither does the tank driver. I'm waiting until we get around 10 mill and i see more good tanks on the field so i can judge our interactions.
Shijima Kuraimaru WarRavens 168	Posted - 2013.03.02 04:14:00 - [17] - Quote Severus Smith wrote: Background (like how modern heavy armor doesn't waste shells firing at a single enemy soldier). I'd like to point you to this... Tank Shot Shell But seriously, Blaster Turrets are meant for use against infantry. Another difference is that Dust vehicles don't have an ammo count. Also, most of the targets are infantry. And the most important factor in a tank shooting a single enemy soldier is that this is a game. Doesn't matter how big the gun is on the vehicle, someone will try to shoot infantry with it and, if successful, it will generate a lot of instant QQ on the forums. Your comparison to our modern mechanized infantry, aka tanks, would be more akin to the rail guns. But that brings us back to a weapon in a game with unlimited ammo. Someone will shoot infantry even with a weapon meant for Anti-Vehicle/Anti-Installation.
Severus Smith ZionTCD Legacy Rising 175	Posted - 2013.03.03 05:46:00 - [18] - Quote Shijima Kuraimaru wrote: Severus Smith wrote: Background (like how modern heavy armor doesn't waste shells firing at a single enemy soldier). I'd like to point you to this... Tank Shot Shell But seriously, Blaster Turrets are meant for use against infantry. Another difference is that Dust vehicles don't have an ammo count. Also, most of the targets are infantry. And the most important factor in a tank shooting a single enemy soldier is that this is a game. Doesn't matter how big the gun is on the vehicle, someone will try to shoot infantry with it and, if successful, it will generate a lot of instant QQ on the forums. Your comparison to our modern mechanized infantry, aka tanks, would be more akin to the rail guns. But that brings us back to a weapon in a game with unlimited ammo. Someone will shoot infantry even with a weapon meant for Anti-Vehicle/Anti-Installation. Ugh. That video is horrifying. Thank god I'm not in the military. As for my proposal, I think that Heavy Tanks would add a lot to the battlefield. Calling one in would ensure that the enemy can't just swarm the field with medium armor while not providing a huge force multiplier to one side (since the heavy tank sucks at hitting infantry).
Ulysses Knapse Nuevo Atlas Corporation 73	Posted - 2013.03.03 16:25:00 - [19] - Quote The is a large discrepancy between LAVs and HAVs. This naturally leaves room for actual MAVs. Would you destroy that opportunity? Severus Smith wrote: That way when a MAV driver sees it he goes "Oh s*" This already happens. If you are rolling around in a standard-fit HAV and you see a Marauder move at you, turret fixated on you, you know you are **. They are already at a moving start, they already have their guns pointed at you, and the vehicle far outclasses yours in every way. No chance of getting the first hit, no chance of escape, no chance of overpowering it. The same occurs even against inferior HAVs if there are multiple of them and only one of you. Infantry doesn't feel the same because they can run and hide, or because they can get lucky and outmaneuver them, but in a HAV battle, things are different. Too big to hide, too slow to run, and too cumbersome to outmaneuver them. Also, multiple AV is a hard counter. Those things will ** with your day. On the other hand, this suggestion would make a class of vehicle with no real counter at all. AV would just be too weak unless they manage to trap you alone with plenty of cover for themselves. Other vehicles would be too fragile unless they outmaneuver you completely.
Raze galder Royal Uhlans Amarr Empire 34	Posted - 2013.03.03 16:43:00 - [20] - Quote Y0UR NAME HERE wrote: Jathniel wrote: I like your idea OP. I really do. I don't however think you need a new class of tanks to pull it off though. Simply adding those illustrated options to currently existing tanks would be great, and I'm sure tank users would agree. Swap out the 80 GJ Blaster, for a quad-barrel autocannon (cutting heat build-up by 75%). Or, swap out a basic railgun, for a double-barrel railgun with alternate firing modes (double fire, or alternating single-fire). Again, great idea. It would make tank vs. tank combat far more varied, but you really don't need a new class of tank for it. This I like, but rail would need a splash buff. Current rail of course I like this idea cause it means the OP can have his super heavy tank with god weapons or u build a medium tank that is fast but does not do much damage i say allow complete vehicle customization by picking frame and everything else and i know there is different frames them but they don't exactly change the look of the vehicle.

Charlotte O'Dell Planetary Response Organisation Test Friends Please Ignore 15	Posted - 2013.03.05 17:10:00 - [21] - Quote I love this idea. It'd be like the Panzer IV vs the King Tiger! We need to add a King Tiger class of tanks! but it needs to be REALLY slow and REALLY well armored with HUGE guns, or at least more than 1 slot for large turrets. However, it should still have one slot for a small turret bc no designer would create a vehicle without a turret since WWII. Anyway, yeah. Huge plus one from me! And for ya'll for think they'd be unkillable, they would be as long as they were supported by infantry. however, without their crunchy buddies, theyd die. hell, the HAV's we have now have a lot of trouble against a well coordinated vehicle effort. Huge plus one from me. +1
Charlotte O'Dell Planetary Response Organisation Test Friends Please Ignore 15	Posted - 2013.03.05 17:11:00 - [22] - Quote Severus Smith wrote: Background There is a current imbalance on the battlefield. Tanks (current HAV's) can lay down serious damage, can redeploy rapidly across the battlefield, and are perfect for assaulting positions. They are the vehicle version of the Assault dropsuit. As such, unlike the Assault dropsuit they are lacking the Heavy element that is their counter. Current tanks have no hard counter. They destroy Installation turrets quickly, can mow down AV infantry with ease, and can run away from / heal through serious damage. Proposal Reclassify our current tanks as MAV's (Medium Assault Vehicles) and add proper Heavy Tanks (like this, this or this). Heavy Tanks would be extremely armored, slow, and have a single main turret that deals 2x damage (double guns). It has no side turrets. It is built to destroy enemy vehicles and installations. Due to it's slow speed, big size, slow turret speed, and large weapons it would be inefficient at killing individual infantry (like how modern heavy armor doesn't waste shells firing at a single enemy soldier). Benefits - This provides a hard counter to current tanks. Did the enemy just call in 3x MAV's, we spawn one HAV to take them out. - This benefits vehicle drivers. You get a new f***ing awesome vehicle. - This fits into New Eden balance. Like EVE, there is always something bigger. But the bigger things can't roflstomp the tiny things because the big guns can't hit them well. - This makes AV more realistic. Yes, 3500 damage from a swarm launcher will one shot a 2000 HP LAV and hurt a 8000 HP MAV. But that'll barely scratch a 32,000 HP HAV. Your gonna need some bigger guns... - Forces vehicle support. Heavy Tanks excel against Medium Tanks and installations, but suck against light vehicles and infantry. Medium Tanks excel against light vehicles and infantry, and suck against Heavy Tanks and installations. Both must work together to counter the others weaknesses. - Remote explosives users have a new, slow moving target. +1


Pages: 1 :: [one page]