We can all agree that heavy armor is well, heavy and should slow you down. Shields are weightless and should not weigh anything. shields need to be faster. In eve, gallenete are second fastest and caldari are the slowest.... in space. Were weight and gravity dont matter. Now were on a planet and these things do matter, this only makes sence and helps balance the tanks. So make armor tanks slow again and shield tanks significantly faster.

If shield tanks were balanced against armour tanks, then how balanced would they be against infantry AV?

Lets assume AV isn't taken into account. Oh wait, there aren't just tankers in every single bloody game, and yes, there will be AV present.

I used to say the best tankers know the map, know the escape routes, know the flanking routes, and know how to get their tanks to those routes, and know their tank's limits.

Well, lets expand on that.

The best tankers know how to take advantage of the fact that THEY ARE NOT THE ONLY ONES ON THE BATTLEFIELD.

Your team is there, and they want points too.

A shield blaster tank with 1 extra gunner who has 3 AV grenades can deal more damage than an armour tank with the same blaster and no gunners.

A shield blaster tank with 2 extra gunners with 6 AV grenades and 1 swarm launcher can deal MUCH more damage than an armour tank with the same blaster and 1 gunner with 3 AV nades.

An armour blaster tank with 2 extra gunners and 6 AV grenades can stomp a shield tank, ONLY if the shield tank lets the armour tank get close enough. And if the shield tank has a gunner who is willing to hop out, throw AV grenades and generally distract the armour tank as the shield tank uses his superior mobility to make haste for the hills, then the shield tank survives.

You forget that although weight is eliminated in space, mass is preserved, and inertia and acceleration are derived from mass. Remember the formula f=ma (net force= mass x acceleration, or acceleration = net force/mass)? That applies everywhere.

So are you disagreeing and say it is better for the balance of the game that armor tanks remain faster than shield tanks?

Sorry, just edited post. I think caldari needs to be buffed but not in the area of speed (passive regen and long range weaponry maybe). I think minmatar will fill that role instead.

That would make Armor tanks obsolete overnight.

Why would I run a tank that is slightly faster without plates when I could run a tank that has better resistances to the two most popular forms of AV AND can run damage mods without completely sacrificing its tank?

Not that I don't think shield tanks are UP right now, but I think we need to think about this about more thoroughly before we start throwing out possible solutions that the crackpots at CCP might take seriously.

very fair point. Though it makes sence, were not getting long range weaponry or minmitar tanks for months, prolly even an entire year. going back to what the OP said, we shouldent have to wait another year for this to get fixed. needs to be fixed now

random derpship post




Derpship


That is all

That would make Armor tanks obsolete overnight.

Why would I run a tank that is slightly faster without plates when I could run a tank that has better resistances to the two most popular forms of AV AND can run damage mods without completely sacrificing its tank?

Not that I don't think shield tanks are UP right now, but I think we need to think about this about more thoroughly before we start throwing out possible solutions that the crackpots at CCP might take seriously.

And okay? hypithetical situations? yes, it is obvious ppl get in the way of things, cool whatever i can make hypthical situations and have a debate too, ppl who gang up on each other win woooooo yeah doesent matter, balance the tanks out so everyone doesent run armor tanks exclusively (like they are now) and the armor tanks dont wreck face 100% the time when they verse the nerfed tank (like they do now) and give ppl reason to spec into a variety of vehicals (wich there is not any now). This thread is about balancing these 2 tanks, not about who gang bangs who the hardest

Yes but no tanker here has specifically spoken about their experiences with a tank crew. Which tank comes out victorious when the majority of AV deals more damage to armour, and both tanks have a 3-man crew?

Have there been any tests into this? Here's another hypothetical situation. If we don't check out 3v3 shield vs. armour scenarios, and in actual fact shields survive for longer, and we balance shields and armour for 1v1, then suddenly shields are OP.

if both tanks have proto AV crews both will die, 1 rail slug and 2 volleys of protoswarm = any tank dead... well maybe some will come out of that on fire.

if both tanks have proto AV crews both will die, 1 rail slug and 2 volleys of protoswarm = any tank dead... well maybe some will come out of that on fire.

I will come out of that without a lick of flame.

My shields EHP are about 9000, and your swarms are going to do -20% anyways to me due to being explosive.

Proto swarms to attack the armor tank and proto forge to attack the sheild tank. there, their both dead

Yes but no tanker here has specifically spoken about their experiences with a tank crew. Which tank comes out victorious when the majority of AV deals more damage to armour, and both tanks have a 3-man crew?

Have there been any tests into this? Here's another hypothetical situation. If we don't check out 3v3 shield vs. armour scenarios, and in actual fact shields survive for longer, and we balance shields and armour for 1v1, then suddenly shields are OP.

Now you're talking, though better yet a pair of forge-gunners since forge-guns do ridiculous damage at the higher tiers anyways, even with the -10% against shields a proto-forge will leave a whopping dent and they kill Madrugars just fine.

Yes but no tanker here has specifically spoken about their experiences with a tank crew. Which tank comes out victorious when the majority of AV deals more damage to armour, and both tanks have a 3-man crew?

Have there been any tests into this? Here's another hypothetical situation. If we don't check out 3v3 shield vs. armour scenarios, and in actual fact shields survive for longer, and we balance shields and armour for 1v1, then suddenly shields are OP.

Voice of someone who's had a fully-crewed shield tank vs. fully-crewed armour tank fight.

To be more precise, all-Missile Gunnlogi (so perfect for anti-Armour) against a Blaster Madrugar with Small Missile Turrets (so not as perfectly anti-Shield), the Madrugar had taken some shield damage AND the Gunnlogi showed up behind the Madrugar after setting up an ambush.

Once it started taking fire, the Madrugar stopped moving, turned around, and just sat there firing at the Gunnlogi. The Gunnlogi, on the other hand, kept moving, trying to reduce the damage it was taking.

With a mobile target, there were occasional misses, or near-misses with splash damage from the Madrugar's Small Turrets, and even some of the Blaster fire was missing its mark. By contrast, the Gunnlogi landed almost every shot fired on the immobile Madrugar.

By the end of the fight, in spite of all the advantages it had, the Gunnlogi was on fire.

I'm sorry, but when you have a tank that's designed to be competent against any threat, and it goes up against a tank that's specifically designed for taking out that particular enemy, and the specialised tank has not only its preferred target but also an ambush going in its favour, AND a better driver, the fight should definitely NOT be close.

NOTE: Other than a few hits to the Madrugar's shields prior to the tank vs. tank encounter (which ended with infantry being wiped out by the Madrugar), there was no direct involvement from AV infantry.

Just throwing it out there that all gunnlogis have 2 pg extenders in their lows.

But i agree armor needs a small buff and shields need a huge buff. They should each fill a niche role and be able to compete.

Possibly a significant increase in the CPU required and a significant decrease in the PG needed for railguns would discourage running a railgun on a madrugar, but not completely remove the possibility of it. Meaning it would be even more convenient to use railguns on a caldari tank than it would be for a gallente tank if they were to make this change, causing caldari to rule long range (it would be able to equip a good railgun turret and damage mods due to its large CPU pool, while retaining tankiness).

Also I think these changes should be made at a factor of 1.25x or 1.5x.

Yeah i have had the same experiences but instead i used a Falshion with proto missles and enforcer 3. shield tanks are so bad! like you said, they can not win using a fit specifically set up to be anti armor tanks. cant even beat the standard madrugar. its pathetic how unbalanced it is, this is why ppl want respecs. so their not horrendously screwed over by balancing issues

Honestly though, running damage mods on a 'Loggi or a Falchion is pretty much suicide if you don't have someone running shield transporters.

I think the only other way you can run a damage mod tank is if you are the anchor and you have another tank operating as a sweeper.

Even then if the other team can get a good fix on you, you will get dropped. A tank with damage mods is not surviving an OB, or a forge gunner prepared to die in the redline to take it out.

I am not really sure how we can go about getting a sort of balance between the two, but I think the first step is to remove the movement penalty from the Falchion entirely. Having it be that slow makes it completely useless as an "enforcer".

The Gunloggi needs a speed bump as well, and both could use a bump in shield regen.

None of that is going to really help it in combat vs a Madrugar though, and that is where the problem lies.

Just saying Shield tanks are for anti-infantry work and armor tanks are for AT doesn't seem like a good solution.

It would be great if the vehicle devs were not so MIA so we could get a better understanding of what they intend the vehicles to be.

https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=925183#post925183

Somewhere in ther

Yeah, they really dont work with us at all and we are suffering for it. i dont want to play tanks anymore because of how lopsided, predictable, and non profitable it has become in this build. Ive yet to see any tanker disagree, wed all rather go infaintry. But, i have a double damage mod gunlogi and i have had many victorys, works in PC as well and in pubs with crazy AV. mind you im very tactical with it,and i even used to be able to destroy most armo tanks because before the triple SP event most armor tanks were not resist madrugers and now they are so im pretty boned. Nothing works anymore, period.

Also, i wouldent say that shield tanks need a speed buff but armor tanks need to go back to chromosome speed, shield tanks are were they are in chromosome speeds. Ill also point out that active sheild mods are unusable and are complete garbage that should never, ever be considered, no matter what. Their that bad, were armor hardners are what wins them all these battles. 10 sec activation time with a 30 sec cool down for 30% resist VS 1 min activation time with 30 sec cool down for 25% resist. not very fair, perhaps we can buff that durration of the shild hardners effictive use from 10 sec to 30 sec, that would be worth having and still no were near as powerful as armor mods. It needs to be at least half as effective., because passive resist is not strong enough to make the differnece for caldari. so buff passive hardners for caldari mods? one or the other, we need something to stand up to you guuys

i love my gunlogi and tbh im glad i specced into it still

but yeah, being against a madruger is pretty much game over for me, unless i pull back and try to snipe it with rail, but i prefer to run mssiles

id be content if gunlogi went a little faster as i'll be popping missiles at maddy not missing yet he will tank that **** and drive straight up to me then blast me to bits or \ also , maybe the missile turrets could fire a little faster than the 2.5 delay they have