Heavy Tanks

[Intruder]

As we at PSU love to speculate and chat about new features..


Since our current tanks (mag,Prwl,van) are labled as "medium tanks" anyone have any speculation on common pool and race specific Heavy tanks.

[nightcr4wler]

I think they're going to be rolling meatshields, as we in EQ like to call them. Like how some people barricade entrances with sunderers, I think the heavy tank is just going to roll into a base, take a shit load of hammering and dish out damage as it veers out the back entrance.

I'm probably wrong but what can get much bigger than a vanguard or a sunderer? I'll be surprised when I see the first sketches of them though.

[Intruder]

I invision a TR tank that has multiple turrets, maybe 2 turrets like the current tank, 1 anti veh 1 anti personel, and a 3rd turret something similar to a skyguards turret. 6 ppl tank.
Kind of like a mobile weapons platform. - actually looking at all the current tanks, all I can invision for a "heavy tank" is something similar to a mobile weapons platform.

[Streamline]

I kinda imagine something as big as say a double wide sunderer capable of taking 2 or 3 times as much damage standing up to even Liberator bombs. Speed will suck and be hidiuosly slow but who cares. As long as you keep moving they can't OS you. 3 to 5 man crews equipt with counter measures, targeting and tragectory features. A deployed feature allowing you to use an external eq term. A self contained unit. This baby operates on NTU and must be recharged at a warpgate. Sanctuary purchases only because of the sheer size, power, and entertainment of seeing how far you can get one.

[kidriot]

nc heavy tank be something like

2 150mm cannons (gunner 1)
(alt fire is firing one at a time. main fire is both at same time)

4 35mm set on top of 150 turret (gunner 2)

goes max 45 kph

[SandTrout]

There will be no heavy tanks, if there are, they will be similar to the current tanks but with more armor and/or bigger guns. If I remember correctly the Prowler was (and may still be) classified as a heavy tank with it's 3-man crew.

[Intruder]

Originally posted by SandTrout
There will be no heavy tanks, if there are, they will be similar to the current tanks but with more armor and/or bigger guns. If I remember correctly the Prowler was (and may still be) classified as a heavy tank with it's 3-man crew.


Spoil all our fun :( we gotta do somethin while at work, and inventing imaginary heavy tanks is this threads attempt.

So go burst someone elses bubble of reality :P

[Revolver]

Mwahaha! New vehicles for NC and VS! Not for TR, since according to trout they already have a heavy tank :twisted:

[Intruder]

Originally posted by Revolver
Mwahaha! New vehicles for NC and VS! Not for TR, since according to trout they already have a heavy tank :twisted:


Yeay finnaly TR get a med tank :p :p :p

[Revolver]

:lol: true true

//edit
A Mini-Prowler hehe

[Intruder]

Originally posted by Revolver
:lol: true true

//edit
A Mini-Prowler hehe

Prowlette ?

[Revolver]

Prowlito

[Antres Midel]

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
You guys have way too much time on your hands


-MIDEL

[Lonehunter]

Originally posted by kidriot
nc heavy tank be something like

2 150mm cannons (gunner 1)
(alt fire is firing one at a time. main fire is both at same time)

4 35mm set on top of 150 turret (gunner 2)

goes max 45 kph

The rate of fire for that would be too quick, if they made a heavy tank for each empire the NC would probably have something like 200mm cannon, I can picture 3 100mm cannons for the TR with maybe a gun turrett equivelent to a Cycler MAX, and for the VS, a giant hover craft with instead of armor, it has an energy ring flowing around it that absorbs damage and will wear down like armor and the flux cannons will be on each end of the tank, the pilot can swich between the two. Just my silly ideas :rolleyes:

[Queensidecastle]

They could make a SUPER tank with like 5 man crews, NTU...etc but would have to restrict it to like 25-30 kph, Tech plants only and like a 20 minute timer.

One of my ideas for this would be a rear facing or top facing area that will allow a player to use thier certs in an attacking platform kind of fashon. For example an Engeneer could lay mines out the back as the tank moves, or a Heavy assault gets to man a fixed weapon that takes an AI MAX type of effectiveness, or an antivehicular guy using the platform weapon and takes on rocking AV abilities

[Lonehunter]

So...Cert specific gunner positions? I like that.

[Queensidecastle]

Also, if they wanted to make this really cool, they could make portions of the vehicle targetable. For example, you could blow up individual turrets just like you can blow up Phalanx turrets, and the super tank would need someone inside to repaire it and cause it to take NTUs

[Lonehunter]

That's region specific damage, U don't think the Devs would do that :(

[Queensidecastle]

Well, in a way the answer is already there. If you have an AMS blow up next to another vehicle, it blows that up too. showing that the best way to code this would be to have each part of the super tank its own little "vehicle" These "vehicles would just be sorta connected to each other for movement purposes, much like how a Galaxy carries a Harrasser

[EarlyDawn]

I'm thinking Overlord Tank from Generals. Two Heavy, Ultra-high bore cannons, and a bunker for troops on the top for an elevated vantage point against infantry. But as we all know, everything in PS has a weakness, so for this tank, it would be against aircraft. This would make the Skyguard vital to using the heavy tank.

That can be common pool, I'll think of Factional ones later.

[00AgentDuck]

There are so many good ideas here and in so many places I wish the devs would put this kindof stuff in. But they seem to only put in their ideas what they think is best, such as CTF where nobody even suggested that.

And also alot of the good ideas get flooded by posts of complaints such "as the lasher is to powerful, nerf it!" what the posters of these complaints don't realise is that one or two posts about the lasher being over powered may be fine but we don't need 50 stating the same thing. What they should do instead of arguing if it's to powerful or not they should just make a poll and people could vote.

I like the cert specific gunner platform and the region specific damage, nice ideas.

[Endless]

There are so many good ideas here and in so many places I wish the devs would put this kindof stuff in. But they seem to only put in their ideas what they think is best, such as CTF where nobody even suggested that.
What?! The Devs actually listening to and implementing what the community wants?! Now thats just crazy talk!!:eek:

[Lonehunter]

Endless I like your sig. :D I have a link to it in my sig.

[Endless]

Heh. I thought it was a unique touch to my rather bland sig. I was bored and decided to hold you to your words.

[kidriot]

the overlord tanks are perfect for heavy common pool tanks in PS.

be sick to have a gatling gun mounted on top that auto fires

[Yogi]

Originally posted by Revolver
Mwahaha! New vehicles for NC and VS! Not for TR, since according to trout they already have a heavy tank :twisted:

heh, anyone who's piloted a Prowler know it barely qualifies as a medium tank. A lightning has a 50:50 chance of killing one.

[Queensidecastle]

wow, your gunners and driver must be in a coma then.

[Lonehunter]

Originally posted by Queensidecastle
wow, your gunners and driver must be in a coma then.

:nod: Yeah Yogi, you must not ever have any good gunners cause when I've drove a prowler, a Lightning has no chance in hell.

[Endless]

Ive been taken out by a lightning in my prowler before. Granted, my gunner was shooting at some squirrels or somethin. Thats why I only let outfit members gun for me.

[Ultimatedogg]

The prowler is pretty sad compared to the others
havin drivin all 3 i can say its easier to die

[Queensidecastle]

Having spent much time with all 3 tank certs, the only one I felt was worth keeping was the Prowler. Get some good gunners (and driver), or dont bother complaining about the Prowler. Once again... Prowler has more DPS than any other tank, faster turning, faster stopping, better turning ratio, better handling on hills, and the ability to focus on 2 seperate targets at once. Unlike the Magrider, the Prowler can be fully mobile while firing both guns simultaniously. The Magrider is forced to strafe or sit still to use both guns. The only downside to the prowler is that you need to spend some time getting yourself some gunners so not many people are patient enough to learn it.

[Ultimatedogg]

well when you put it that way...

[Eliaas_Demens]

Decimator magnets.

[Headrattle]

Originally posted by SandTrout
There will be no heavy tanks, if there are, they will be similar to the current tanks but with more armor and/or bigger guns. If I remember correctly the Prowler was (and may still be) classified as a heavy tank with it's 3-man crew.

The main PS page lables the Prowler as a Medium Tank. Also, Smoke said himself that it was NOT a typo.

I would like to see something that has an ALT fire on the main gun. Where the gunner can switch between Sabot and Heat rounds. Plus each Tank would take one more gunner then their Empire's medium tank.

SO!

TR would have duel 100 mm main cannons on a large turret. It would also have a 75mm grenade launcher towards the front with a 270degree rotation and a 20mm MG with a 360 rotation on the 100 mm turret. The main cannon can shoot Sabot or Heat rounds.

NC would have a large 150 mm cannon that shoots Sabot or Heat rounds. With a Turreted 35mm on the front 270 degrees.

Both of these would have a speed of 50KPH.

The VS would have a Hover tank that goes 45Kph (the Magrider is slower so why not) and that stupid Rail gun up top. The second gunner would shoot lasher or thresher like projectiles for the infantry, and the gunner would have his crappy weapon.

Bump up the Armor and decrease the agility of all three when compaired to the meduim tanks.

For those of you who don't know what Sabot or Heat is, I'll tell you. Sabot is used against Tanks and has great stopping power. But no explosive power. These weapons would kill an Infantry or Max with a direct hit (which would be hard.) The vehciles would take mroe damamge the heavier their armor is. So you could take out a tank with two shots, but a Harrasser would take much more (it would pass through the vehicle not destroying it.)

The Heat rounds are explosive, and used against vehicles, and (maybe) infantry. They would to less damage the higher the armor rating, but it would be able to kill infantry.

Those are my ideas.

[Warborn]

Originally posted by Queensidecastle
The only downside to the prowler is that you need to spend some time getting yourself some gunners so not many people are patient enough to learn it.

I'm going to have to disagree with this. Generally speaking, a player who considers himself a tanker will only let his Outfit-mates in his tank with him. Or, at least, that's my perception on it. Back when I used to drive a Prowler a lot, I would be in voice chat with my gunners all the time, and would never allow a non-Outfit member to gun for me, simply because 95% of them are complete and utter retards who are more than happy to waste ammo on shooting nothing, rather than enemies. Anyway, as I was saying, part of being a good tank crew is being in voice chat to allow for easy communication.

Unfortunately though, because the Prowler's two weapon systems can be fired by two separate gunners, in my experience, the main gun of the Prowler was tweaked downward to compensate. It is a weaker gun, because it has a backup 12mm. Now, the whole point of this is that unless I can get another person in my Outfit to ride 12mm for me, my tank will be automatically weaker than the other tanks. I admit, the 12mm isn't a hell of a lot of fun, so not many people really like to do it, but nobody wanting to gun it aside, sometimes you really just don't have people to spare.

Anyway, I'm not saying the Prowler sucks or should be boosted or anything, but saying that its only disadvantage is that an impatient driver will lose out is inaccurate. A driver who wants to have two gunners who he knows are reasonably good and, at the very least, are able to stay in contact via voice with him, will lose out. Even a patient driver like myself will sometimes be forced to go out with only a 100mm gunner, because nobody wanted to gun the 12mm's, or because nobody was left to gun the 12mm's. This dependency on having an extra person means that in many situations, the Prowler will be understrength compared to other tanks. That is its main drawback.

[Yogi]

Originally posted by Lonehunter187
:nod: Yeah Yogi, you must not ever have any good gunners cause when I've drove a prowler, a Lightning has no chance in hell.

I wasn't really saying that. I was commenting on how low the survivability of the Prowler is as compared to the other tanks. Especially since it's been deemed "heavy" when the term "medium" barely fits.

[Vowels]

I think they should implement the SOE equivalent of Battle-mechs for heavy tanks. :)

[Intruder]

Originally posted by Vowels
I think they should implement the SOE equivalent of Battle-mechs for heavy tanks. :)

Atlas for TR?
Blackhawk for Vanu ?
Madcat for NC ?


;)

[pauljar1]

Beef up the guns and armor on the Prowler making it a "Heavy Tank" and juice up the LIghtning turning it into a Medium Tank.

[pauljar1]

*bump*

[Yogi]

I'd love to see the Lightning have a bit more armor.

[Queensidecastle]

My first vehicle cert when I started PS was the lightning. First time I took it out in battle and an infantry blew me to shreds I dropped it immediatly never to return. Hell, I felt a lot more secure in a MAX suit

[Seether]

I want one of these!

Challenger 2 MBT (http://www.fprado.com/armorsite/chall2.htm)

Was reading an article recently about these tanks in the war on iraq, about one Challenger that drove over a landmine and it barely cracked the tank. Also mentioned how 14 Challenger 2's went up against 14 of the iraqi tanks and blew them all to crap without taking a single loss themselves...now thats how heavy tanks should be!

[EarlyDawn]

Originally posted by kidriot
the overlord tanks are perfect for heavy common pool tanks in PS.

be sick to have a gatling gun mounted on top that auto fires I was considering that for my vision, but I thought that it would make it sufficent against aircraft, so I decided against it. I think any tank this crazy needs to have some weakness.

[EDIT: Intruder, the "blackhawk"? I'm not familliar with it. Got a site link or book reference? Inner Sphere or Clan? Atlas fits the TR perfectly, I mean picture perfect, and the Madcat, it's heavily armed varients, are awesome for the NC, hehe :D ]

[Kaltagesta]

haha, the challenger has heating and air con! brilliant! just what you need when you get a cloud full of anthrax! [im aware of its NCB protection]

i think in PS you should have like an 'inside' view of the gal or sund, and you can play cards or something

[EarlyDawn]

Originally posted by Call-The-Gestap
haha, the challenger has heating and air con! brilliant! just what you need when you get a cloud full of anthrax! [im aware of its NCB protection]

i think in PS you should have like an 'inside' view of the gal or sund, and you can play cards or something That was one of the cool features of WWII-Online (It needed all it could get), the tanks were represented from an inside view out of your view slots, and I believe some of the commander slots got a parascope and an elevated seat. Anyway, if infantry could shoot through the slots, it could conceivably hit you if you were behind that slot (Your characters were tracked in the tank). So naturally, you could button up, cutting down visability, but stopping that potentially deadly bullet from those infantry until you drive over there and crush them :p

[Happy lil Elf]

i think in PS you should have like an 'inside' view of the gal or sund, and you can play cards or something

That's just what I want, the people in my vehicle play cards instead of paying attention :p

[Ghryphen]

There will be no heavy tanks, if there are, they will be similar to the current tanks but with more armor and/or bigger guns. If I remember correctly the Prowler was (and may still be) classified as a heavy tank with it's 3-man crew.
Oops...he were wrongo :groovy:

[Spee]

OMFG. NO ONE HAS SAID THIS YET.


BFR'S = HEAVY TANKS!


Holy crap. The dumb in this thread...

[Ghryphen]

OMFG. NO ONE HAS SAID THIS YET.

BFR'S = HEAVY TANKS!


Holy crap. The dumb in this thread...
How ironic :doh:

[Boomer]

i think theses ideas would be better than the BFRs

[Warborn]

i think theses ideas would be better than the BFRs

Not that you're biased or anything.

I POST GUD

The thread is over a year old.

[hazzer2007]

They have come out already, BFR's

Edit

i think in PS you should have like an 'inside' view of the gal or sund, and you can play cards or something

They do. Next time you get in a gal (when you jump in), look at the people siting next to you, sometimes they are reading a paper (look like they are) or somtimes they are standing up leaning on the head rest. NO JOKE. Or try it in a WG, when its in flight, fly into it. You will be amased

[Sabinius]

before we get a whole new balancing problem with even STRONGER ground vehicles, possibly we can make empire specific two man air crafT? fun fun

[Sabinius]

and all this talk with turrets, skyguard weaponry, ect.
All this stuff is old stuff
We need something new and interesting
not just the same old guns on a bigass new design vehicle

[hazzer2007]

see, what i told you

Look (http://www.members.lycos.co.uk/trickon/4images/details.php?image_id=141)

reading the paper. I know its not what you said, but look, its a start

[Warborn]

see, what i told you

IMG-Galaxy

reading the paper

1) This thread is over a year old. It's a little late to be replying to it.

2) You shouldn't direct link huge-ass pictures like that, because they break the tables and make viewing the page your unnecessarily large and unlinked picture is on a pain in the ass to view.

3) That's not even what he was referring to. He was talking about an interior to the galaxy that you could do stuff in while the galaxy was en route, to let the passengers pass time by playing cards or something.

[Ghryphen]

1. I bumped it cause it was interesting reading the speculations compared to what we know today and figured it would spark discussion.

2. It wasn't that much of a pain and it only affected his postbit table.

3. It was a joke.

[Warborn]

1. I bumped it cause it was interesting reading the speculations compared to what we know today and figured it would spark discussion.

2. It wasn't that much of a pain and it only affected his postbit table.

3. It was a joke.

1. I wasn't writing that to you, I was writing it to hazzer2007.

2. It's still a good habit to get into linking images.

3. See 1.

[Ghryphen]

My post was in response to you commenting on his post, not thinking you were directing it at me.

[Warborn]

My post was in response to you commenting on his post, not thinking you were directing it at me.

So, what, you're trying to reply for him? I don't get it. You posted to make your joke. Super, I'm sure if SandTrout still posted here he'd be embarassed at his lack of foresight or whatever. Then, hazzer posted as if to continue a long-dead discussion. Waste of time, says I. He was also misunderstanding what the original person was saying. I don't see how him clearly misunderstanding something, and even going so far as to post a screenshot to illustrate that Galaxies do actually have an interior of sorts to them, was a joke as you said it was. And in response to me telling him that there's no point in trying to continue the aside that one guy made about galaxies having an interior, you told me why you bumped the thread? And then you said his misunderstanding was actually a joke? Is this basically what's going on? I'm not missing anything?

[Ghryphen]

So, what, you're trying to reply for him? I don't get it. You posted to make your joke. Super, I'm sure if SandTrout still posted here he'd be embarassed at his lack of foresight or whatever. Then, hazzer posted as if to continue a long-dead discussion. Waste of time, says I. He was also misunderstanding what the original person was saying. I don't see how him clearly misunderstanding something, and even going so far as to post a screenshot to illustrate that Galaxies do actually have an interior of sorts to them, was a joke as you said it was. And in response to me telling him that there's no point in trying to continue the aside that one guy made about galaxies having an interior, you told me why you bumped the thread? And then you said his misunderstanding was actually a joke? Is this basically what's going on? I'm not missing anything?

Yes I am replying in defense of him. I mentioned that I bumped the thread to induce comments on previous discussions also to reinforce that defense. I could care less if SandTrout is around (btw he is), makes no difference to the original purpose of the bump. But I guess the humor passes by some people... ie below:

I don't see how him clearly misunderstanding something, and even going so far as to post a screenshot to illustrate that Galaxies do actually have an interior of sorts to them, was a joke as you said it was.
He is implying that they are reading newspapers/magizines in that galaxy sshot, I understood it as a joke.

[Warborn]

Yes I am replying in defense of him. I mentioned that I bumped the thread to induce comments on previous discussions also to reinforce that defense. I could care less if SandTrout is around, makes no difference to the original purpose of the bump. But I guess the humor passes by some people... ie below:

If you wanted to spur new discussion you shouldn't have resurrected a year+ old thread. The number of replies in this thread assuming that the posts before yours aren't incredibly old should demonstrate my point quite clearly.

Also, should I be directed my replies to hazzer2007 to you instead, or are you only posting for him today?

He is implying that they are reading newspapers/magizines in that galaxy sshot, I understood it as a joke.

Yeah, that humor must have passed me by like nothing before, because I'm vomiting out my intestines -- such is the fury of my laughter -- now that I realize what he was writing was actually a joke.

[Ghryphen]

Actually I wanted to see how people would respond as to what was said in previous speculations by bumping this thread. However I shall now clearly state my intentions if this ever were to happen again so those who need to loosen up a bit will understand and won't derail the original intent. I figured it would be clear enough, I suppose I was wrong.

And as for replying for him or me; as much as you feel you have the right to condemn peoples posting, I feel I can have the right to defend them if I wish.

[internetn]

Is it wrong to question why somebody started up a pretty much dead thread?

No

Is it wrong to make such a big deal about it and argue with a ADM?

Possibly

Who cares if the threads a year old? I don't, and it seems not many other people do either. So why don't we stop acting like three year olds and try to post normally.

I think a Heavy Tank would be awsome, but then I said that about the BFR's and everybody whines about how much they change the game, and their too strong. I think they add a sense of evolution to the game. Technology gets better, some people get pissed, and other people incorporate it to the advancement of humanity. To bad I'm not a VS, my ideals seem to be better suited towards there philosphy

[Spee]

/me never looks at time stamps.
/me sucks at this game. =/

[Baneblade]

I want my Devastator.

[WritheNC]

I haven't read any posts in this thread.

To me, BFR's are the heavy tanks with an extreme range of mobility. I would prefer normal heavy tanks thought I guess.

[Warborn]

Who cares if the threads a year old? I don't, and it seems not many other people do either. So why don't we stop acting like three year olds and try to post normally.

Yeah, this thread is a hot-bead of discussion. Why, look at all the people who were posting in a manner which Gryphon had expected. Although there are far too many to count by hand alone, there's at least one person posting "on topic", as it were. Incredible!

Who cares if the threads a year old? The fact that every post since the the bump that wassn't been related to the same vein of posts as my post here is had been one accidentally assuming that this thread isn't over a year old should have made it hernia-inducingly clear who should care if it's a year old.

But maybe if I post more we'll get enough backseat admins to jump in, try to post against me, and then do their best to prove that Gryphon wasn't mistaken in his assumption as to the value of bumping an incredibly old thread. I mean, Christ, if it weren't for me bumping this thread with my posts, it'd be well on its way back down to the basement again, wouldn't it?

[martyr]

warborn, i have two things i'd like to point out.

first, gryphon is not a "back seat admin." i don't even know what that is, actually. he's a full-on administrator. i myself am a super-moderator and make no claims to the auspicious title of "administrator" here at PSU, although we staff refer to ourselves collectively as the "admin team."

second: you're criticizing him for bumping a thread?
not only that, but on the grounds that he was "mistaken in his assumptions as to the value of bumping" this thread?

you have got to be kidding.

sod off, get a life.




now, as for the heavy tanks:

i think, and this sentiment has been echoed countless times in the last few weeks, that the most important feature of any heavy tank vehicle would be the required crew. this is something that's been highlighted in the many discussions regarding gunships, airships, and naval vessels (nuclear wessels?).

[Ghryphen]

Maybe it would have been on topic had someone who is not a moderator didn't try and moderate peoples posting as so many people think they have the right to do here. Worthless comments are quite annoying and I got a bit frustrated at the fact someone was making yet another 1.2.3. points post in an effort to attack another persons post adding zero value to a thread and made me go nazi.

Maybe had you not made your lame attack on another persons post and pushed me over the edge the thread would have had a different turn. But no, you have no fault right?

Lighten up, take the stick out of your ass. You win, thread closed....or does that make me win?