Little Angus
CowTek IT Infotech
2
|
Posted - 2013.05.08 19:12:00 -
[1] - Quote
Ranger SnakeBlood wrote:Iam no tanker so i may be a bit biased in what i say. but i agree tanks should take a beating a sever one.
The main balance issue is see is large blasters is a anti infantry weapon and is very very effective at it i know this is most likely the scissors calling the rock op but hear me out if the large blaster is so good at killing infantry then what is the propose of small blasters on tanks do deal with infantry no?
My answer all main guns on tanks should be suppression or support based against infantry blasters should have far less rate of fire but have a decent splash area of effect to harass infantry but the primary method of killing them should be either other infantry or the small turrets on the tank or other vehicles. This would make small turrets useful and a good position to have filled.
Tanks should be very effective against light and medium vehicles but should take a good amount of effort to kill another tank. The before mentioned light and medium vehicles should be faster and much better at anti infantry than a tank, a good example of a medium vehicle that could excel at anti infantry but be weak against tanks is APCs, IFVs, Mtac or something like the lighting tank from planet side 2 a fast nimble tank with a medium turret on board.
As far as tanks and hp it has yes more would be good but tanks should also be heavy with very slow acceleration it can still go at same speed but cant just get up and go when it feel like its going down running away should be difficult to do. how many hits of AV weapons should a well fit standard tank take iam not sure iam thinking somewhere in the 6 to 8 region that's killable for a good AV team of 3 or 4,
Tank on tank battles should last at least 3 to 4 shots form the main turret assuming a fire rate similar to a shot from a rail gun perhaps a bit slower.
One of the better balances ive seen on the forums was make the driver have access to the front mounted small turret and the large turret be passenger controlled this would mean for a tank to be fielded effectively it would need at least a 2 man crew which balances against the av crew that would need to kill it, people can say isk balance all they want but currently its player per match that is main resource that needs to balance equipment.
One of the main issues i can see that stand in the way of properly having definite answer to whats wrong is we dont have alot of other vehicles or AV to see what effect they have on tanks or what effect tanks have on them so we can only balance what we got now which may hurt the something in some un seen way for example the only natural prey of tanks we have right now is LAV and i hope there will be more than that ov
Id like to know what the views of a tanker are on my suggestions as i said at the beginning i could be a bit biased.
Edit:Oh and last note they need to have a ammo bay that needs to be restocked by returning to base for example or by supply chains via vehicles supply depots, of specialised logis?
Ranger
I am someone who uses tanks only, and I think those ideas of yours is a bunch of garbage. That's my views on your big suggestions. My response is harsh, yes, but try using tanks only for a month, and see if you begin to think differently. Pay out lots of isk, then re-think the idea of having your passengers control the large turret of the tank you paid for. Think about your frustration when the passenger has the large turret and starts shooting at rocks, the ground, the MCC, etc. Not a good 'balance' in my opinion, just tipping the scales to FAIL.
|