Tank rear armour versus Pods

[Gimpylung]

I'm pretty sure rear armour on tanks was made weak so that other tanks and infantry had an Achilles heel to exploit. That's fine with me, I drive tanks and that kind of mechanic is perfectly acceptable.

Supposedly top armour is available as an option on tanks to reduce damage that tanks receive from aircraft. Unfortunately it's utterly useless as rocketpodders are exploiting the weak rear armour mechanic designed to give ground forces a chance against the tank.

It would be nice if damage from rocketpods specifically to tanks sensitive fat arses was reduced so that they can't make dust out of me in just one pass.

Maybe, modify top armour so that it also increases rear protection from pods specifically. That might make top armour a worthwhile addition to a tank again, it was only ever somewhat justifiable to use when libs were OP and the sky was black with them.

[Corvo]

It could be simply done by adding wide rear flaps to top armor.

If it should be done is an entirely different question. Attacking a vehicle from behind is a skill-based tactic. I don't fly very often as I generally prefer infantry combat over vehicle combat but from my experience in the VR training area I can tell it's a pretty hard thing to pull off. This game is already not very skill-heavy with too many random things to factor in and you are suggesting to remove one of the few skill-based factors.

I am personally with you on this one, but then again I'd support any rocketpod nerf just because I think we need more skill-based weapons for aircraft and more of them in general with distinct roles for each. Rocketpods shouldn't be the only viable thing when you are equipping your ESF. I expect many pilots will object to this though.

[PredatorFour]

Yeh attacking a vehicle from behind is a skill based tactic. Though , it takes little skill to achieve this. In a esf it is really easy to swoop past and hit a tank from behind, there's no skill involved really from an air stand point at least.

What they need to do imo, is give us the chance to cert rear armour on our tanks = problem solved.

[snafus]

With the current state of AA in this game if a ESF can sneak up on armor and achieve this shot they should be rewarded for the effort. With all of the potential threats to air that the game gives players atm why are people still having issues? I have an opinion on that and it is simply a failure to pull proper security on your armor assets. If you have armor you have to protect it and that means burster and skyguards on stand by watching all angles of approach. If you fail to do this air will be able to kill any armor left undefended as it should rightfully do. I don't get mad when a vanguard snipes me out of the sky I just accept he made a great shot and vengefully hunt his ass down. This is how the game works and there are ways to protect your armor it just requires team work and less QQ.

[Dragonskin]

With the current state of AA in this game if a ESF can sneak up on armor and achieve this shot they should be rewarded for the effort. With all of the potential threats to air that the game gives players atm why are people still having issues? I have an opinion on that and it is simply a failure to pull proper security on your armor assets. If you have armor you have to protect it and that means burster and skyguards on stand by watching all angles of approach. If you fail to do this air will be able to kill any armor left undefended as it should rightfully do. I don't get mad when a vanguard snipes me out of the sky I just accept he made a great shot and vengefully hunt his ass down. This is how the game works and there are ways to protect your armor it just requires team work and less QQ.

The whole point of threads like this is about 1v1. Team work anything has to be thrown out the door in these threads. Most people think that all things need to be equal 1v1 in all situations.

Anyway, I'm with you on this. I fly ESFs and I use tanks. If a ESF blows me up from behind then chances are there were no allies near me to begin with so grats to the ESF for doing their intended role... you know the whole air to ground missile thing.... that is supposed to take out vehicles instead of just farm infantry.

Good luck piloting a ESF in a heavy contested area and if you get blown up from behind in a heavy ally area then chances are he killed you and died shortly after due to bursters, lock-ons, AA turrets... So all he wanted to do is get 1 kill before he died.

As a tank driver you should be mindful of your surroundings. If you are really worried then buy a walker/ranger and have someone with you to watch your back. Otherwise I can't feel sorry for solo tank drivers. ESF pilots already have a pretty rough time with all the AA around and the recent nerf to their pods for infantry farming. At least allow them to do their primary function.

[fierce deity]

The solution to this is to add the option to cert into rear armor. It should not stop an esf that is determined to take you out in a 1v1 situation or a tank that managed to sneak behind you, but it would give you enough time to properly react.
I would also like to be able to be able to equip multiple armors(two would be fine as it adds defense without being overly OP) at one time. With that you could equip both mineguard, which is practically a must have, and front armor if you are going to try to push against an opposing tank column, place top and rear armor on your skyguard loadout, or any other useful combo you can think of.

[Rbstr]

I used to think it was a bit too easy.

Now that every object on the continent has 5 AA guns poking out of it. I'm not so sympathetic to the tanks.

[ThatGoatGuy]

If you are an intelligent tank drivers, you always run a walker on your second gun. That way, even if you are lone wolfing it, you can just hop in your walker.

[Neutral Calypso]

If you are an intelligent tank drivers, you always run a walker on your second gun. That way, even if you are lone wolfing it, you can just hop in your walker.

I tested it in VR. An MBT's walker has the same TTK an aircraft as a skyguard. (The Skyguard is just nominally more accurate).

So what are you waiting for? Put a walker on your tank unless you're running with a group that's already got AA!

[Ghodere]

So long as anyone can pull a tank at any time with no downsides, they must continue to be manufactured out of paper-mache. So long as a single ESF can do everything effectively with a single loadout, they must continue to be crippled around AA. Underlying design issues are handicapping the game and necessitating band-aid fixes that give the illusion of balance.

[ringring]

If you are an intelligent tank drivers, you always run a walker on your second gun. That way, even if you are lone wolfing it, you can just hop in your walker.

I do, it doesn't help. Not that in favour of the suggestion, I think being wiped out in a single pass is annoying but then there has to be annoying things in the game otherwise it would simply be bland, so I put up with it..

Personally all I ask for as a tank driver is to make the minimap work. The things that destroy my while driving never appear there and I'm speaking about the AT Turret in the main.

[Thunderhawk]

With the amount AA has changed over the course of the last few months and the fact that being able to hit a <FULL CLIP OF LOLPODS, EVERY ROCKET HITTING> into the back of a Tank requires you to be vulnerable to AA Flack from the many many different sources, makes this a moot point.

You need to think of the game as Force vs Force not MBT vs ESF.

Sorry but Planetside 2 was not meant to be a 1v1 game.

The amount of times I have had to turn and run half way through an "unload" to not blow up due to the AA gun on top of a Prowler, the AA MAX standing Next to it, or the Skyguard sniping me from 500 meters away makes me have this sort of opinion.

Don't have a bad night of being instagibbed by some ESFs that had no one shooting at them and then say buff tank rear armour.

I think that needs to remain as is.

[HiroshiChugi]

I'm with Thunderhawk on this one. Tanks, if any weakness at all, needs to be their rear armor. It shows that they aren't invincible and are actually destroyable. As a Dumbfire Rocket Pods user, I often find taht when I DO line up a shot, I RARELY ever am able to unload a full clip without being destroyed (except in VR :D). Honestly, I think that some of these so-called expert armour drivers need to try out the rocket pods themselves and see what they are up against. I mean, hey, just trial them for 30 min. It's just half an hour of your life... :P

[psijaka]

I'm with Thunderhawk too; tanks should have a weak spot, and if an ESF sneaks in low and strafes their ass off then good luck to them.

And speaking from an AV MAX point of view, I am very much against people being able to cert up rear armour; tanks would just be able to charge in and overwhelm infantry without infantry cover.

[PredatorFour]

Fair enough then why don't us flyers get weak spots? or sundys even ? In the games current state every vehicle should have a weak spot if this is the case imo. You should be given the choice to make the weak spot stronger, but sacrifice another area.

My real hope however is that somewhere along the line they get rid of the rear weak spot and make it like the original planetside. After all the new AV weapons in the game the weak spots maybe wont be needed in the future.

[HiroshiChugi]

Fair enough then why don't us flyers get weak spots?

Because our armor is our weakspot. ESF's have very little armour to begin with, so giving them even lesser armour in certain spots would just make them completely useless.

[Maarvy]

Getting rear loled is maddening sometimes , although its possible to avoid and out heal 1 lol podder and much easier to avoid in a magrider than any other mbt .

Let top armour cover the rear plate too so they can withstand 1 volley ... but only just .meaning a decent pilot will still finish you with his rotary if you dont react or repair real quick .

[Thunderhawk]

The time it takes you to unload a full clip of ammo (and it has to be a full clip) into the rear of a MBT varies slightly depending on faction. I don't have the numbers to hand (so apologies), but lets say roughly between 3 seconds and 7 seconds ?

Either way, its either 3 secs or more.... and if an ESF is being hit by FLAK by even 1 (YES ONE) AA source for 3 seconds, it's toast, even with Full Composite armour.

Its a matter of Rock-Paper-Scissors

[snafus]

Fair enough then why don't us flyers get weak spots? or sundys even ? In the games current state every vehicle should have a weak spot if this is the case imo. You should be given the choice to make the weak spot stronger, but sacrifice another area.

My real hope however is that somewhere along the line they get rid of the rear weak spot and make it like the original planetside. After all the new AV weapons in the game the weak spots maybe wont be needed in the future.

Our weakness is any form of projectile in the game can harm us. not even considering the much higher skill gap between driving a tank and an ESF. And don't forget that unless your a prowler it only takes one shot from your main gun to to ruin that ESF day.

[Assist]

It would be nice if damage from rocketpods specifically to tanks sensitive fat arses was reduced so that they can't make dust out of me in just one pass.


I was never an ESF pilot, and never bought rocket pods until two weeks ago because I always found them cheap. I bought them because I was tired of getting killed by ESF's in one pass, so I figured I may as well join the crowd and become a lame-ass like the rest of the rocketpod scrubs.

Having them now, seeing how difficult it is to use them and shoot a tank in the ass, I have to say that they're even easier than I ever imagined.

I seriously hope they nerf rocketpods into the ground even more. I can make a pass at full speed and take out a tank, with 0 chance of being destroyed as long as my flares are up. In most cases two bursters wouldn't even have a chance to kill me, unless it was my 3rd/4th/5th pass in a row. But as it is right now, the rocketpods to a tank are the equivilent of a shotgun to the face. No warning, ridiculous reward, and 0 threat unless you overstay your welcome.

[Gimpylung]

I'm talking about situations within the context of a large battle with many other things going on. Surrounded by friendly armour and infantry and friendly AA covering.

While I appreciate that its annoying that AA can make you fly away and deny your, invariably, guaranteed kill occasionally I would ask that you genuinely consider the plight of the tanker.

We can't fly away from land mines, c4 light assaults, mana turrets, decis, standard launchers, lock on launchers, ESAV and annihilators. There's also the minor issue of the other enemy tanks and AV base turrets that we have to deal with. But I can cope with all that, coz thats ground based stuff and that's the 2D plane that I exist on.

What I can't cope with is the suggestion that I give up my secondary AV or AI cannon and swap it for an AA gun to merely chase of ESF's and act purely as a counter to a particularly cheap attack from the air.

You guys appear to be defending your right to get soft kills because it's so hard to be a pilot these days and you continually have to break off attacks and fly away. Escape, what a luxury.

I'll be engaging armour on the ground, with multiple lock-ons from infantry launchers lighting me up and c4 lights running about, I can cope with all that, then out of the blue a barrage of pods hits me in the rear and my tank is dust in 3 seconds and thats that.

You guys have to deal with AA that makes you fly away, I just die, no other options. And please don't tell me that flanking around low behind a battle in an ESF and swooping in behind a couple of tanks, wiping one out and flying off before the AA even sees you is hard or skillful guys. Cmon guys. I don't exist in some tanker bubble where that is the limit of my experience and have no concept of what it is to fly or have never spoken to an experienced flyer.

I'm not suggesting an across the boards buff to tanks, or a nerf to your pods guys. I'm merely suggesting that I have the option to choose a useful top armour that might actually be worth swapping out mineguard or front/side armour to use.

I think its a reasonable suggestion.

[GraniteRok]

The majority of my time being a ground pounder, I agree that rocket pods are too powerful, infantry and vehicles. Tanks are much to vulnerable to rockets. It should take a couple of passes to kill a tank. I'd hate to say nerf the damage although I believe they still are but maybe widen the cone? If a pilot wants to land every shot, they should have to get up close and personal. These guys that hang back just at render distance and spam rockets shouldn't be able to pinpoint hit anything.

One thing that came to mind back with the pilots had the 'no lock on' warning and there was a massive cryfest about that. Us tankers get nothing when ordnance is coming in such as rockets or lib cannon fire. Maybe if we had a warning tone that something is on the way so we can do some evasive maneuvers.

[Dragonskin]

The majority of my time being a ground pounder, I agree that rocket pods are too powerful, infantry and vehicles. Tanks are much to vulnerable to rockets. It should take a couple of passes to kill a tank. I'd hate to say nerf the damage although I believe they still are but maybe widen the cone? If a pilot wants to land every shot, they should have to get up close and personal. These guys that hang back just at render distance and spam rockets shouldn't be able to pinpoint hit anything.

One thing that came to mind back with the pilots had the 'no lock on' warning and there was a massive cryfest about that. Us tankers get nothing when ordnance is coming in such as rockets or lib cannon fire. Maybe if we had a warning tone that something is on the way so we can do some evasive maneuvers.

You want a warning tone for a missile coming at your general area that may not even be aimed directly at you? I'll pass. I don't want 20 warnings going off when I am near other tanks. That would be highly annoying.

The "cryfest" was simply that lock-ons didn't give warning. That was changed and you get the same warning that pilots get when you are locked-on. So it works both ways.

I can't seriously see how you guys think ESFs are OP against tanks. WTF else are rocketpods for? It takes an entire clip to kill your tank. You can 1 shot a ESF (2-shot as a TR) with your main gun. You have the option of not being derka and having a 2nd gunner just to defend you against ESFs if you wanted. You could slot top armor and simply move either backwards or forwards to cause the rockets to hit the top armor. You could get rival chassis upgrades so that you can turn your butt faster. If you are VS you can magburn away from the damage and if you are NC you can pop your shield to negate the damage completely. TR get slightly screwed, but the TR tank is different than the other 2 in general anyway with anchormode being more of an offensive ability instead of defensive like the other 2. The fact is that you can't be bothered to to change your build to combat ESFs and instead just want them nerfed.

Speaking of crap no one uses. Who uses IR smoke? No one. Ever. Actually a few people have, but in my 9 days of playing time I can count on my hand how many times I have seen someone use IR smoke. I can't stand when people cry about getting killed with rockets in a tank.

[Assist]

You want a warning tone for a missile coming at your general area that may not even be aimed directly at you? I'll pass. I don't want 20 warnings going off when I am near other tanks. That would be highly annoying.

The "cryfest" was simply that lock-ons didn't give warning. That was changed and you get the same warning that pilots get when you are locked-on. So it works both ways.

I can't seriously see how you guys think ESFs are OP against tanks. WTF else are rocketpods for? It takes an entire clip to kill your tank. You can 1 shot a ESF (2-shot as a TR) with your main gun. You have the option of not being derka and having a 2nd gunner just to defend you against ESFs if you wanted. You could slot top armor and simply move either backwards or forwards to cause the rockets to hit the top armor. You could get rival chassis upgrades so that you can turn your butt faster. If you are VS you can magburn away from the damage and if you are NC you can pop your shield to negate the damage completely. TR get slightly screwed, but the TR tank is different than the other 2 in general anyway with anchormode being more of an offensive ability instead of defensive like the other 2. The fact is that you can't be bothered to to change your build to combat ESFs and instead just want them nerfed.

Speaking of crap no one uses. Who uses IR smoke? No one. Ever. Actually a few people have, but in my 9 days of playing time I can count on my hand how many times I have seen someone use IR smoke. I can't stand when people cry about getting killed with rockets in a tank.

IR smoke takes the place of the Magburner I believe, so.. yeah. You really think that's a good swap out?
Also, it doesn't take anywhere near a full clip to kill a tank, as it's extremely easy to get behind a tank when you're in the air. I think it's only 4 rounds of rocket pods to kill a tank from behind? Maybe 5? I know it's not anywhere near the full clip, as I do it every day now because it's the best XP in the game to farm tanks/lightnings currently. 90k/hr, using only rocket pods without double XP is not balanced O.o
Also, I'd love to see a Magrider hit 1/10 shots on an ESF. If a Magrider is even able to aim high enough to hit the ESF, than that pilot is a complete turd

[GraniteRok]

Suggestion only. More intended that we have an incoming rounds from air. And about the "cryfest", welcome to our world, every day not just during that bug. And yes, most believe rocket pods are OP against everything.

You want a warning tone for a missile coming at your general area that may not even be aimed directly at you? I'll pass. I don't want 20 warnings going off when I am near other tanks. That would be highly annoying.

The "cryfest" was simply that lock-ons didn't give warning. That was changed and you get the same warning that pilots get when you are locked-on. So it works both ways.

I can't seriously see how you guys think ESFs are OP against tanks. WTF else are rocketpods for? It takes an entire clip to kill your tank. You can 1 shot a ESF (2-shot as a TR) with your main gun. You have the option of not being derka and having a 2nd gunner just to defend you against ESFs if you wanted. You could slot top armor and simply move either backwards or forwards to cause the rockets to hit the top armor. You could get rival chassis upgrades so that you can turn your butt faster. If you are VS you can magburn away from the damage and if you are NC you can pop your shield to negate the damage completely. TR get slightly screwed, but the TR tank is different than the other 2 in general anyway with anchormode being more of an offensive ability instead of defensive like the other 2. The fact is that you can't be bothered to to change your build to combat ESFs and instead just want them nerfed.

Speaking of crap no one uses. Who uses IR smoke? No one. Ever. Actually a few people have, but in my 9 days of playing time I can count on my hand how many times I have seen someone use IR smoke. I can't stand when people cry about getting killed with rockets in a tank.

[Assist]

Suggestion only. More intended that we have an incoming rounds from air. And about the "cryfest", welcome to our world, every day not just during that bug. And yes, most believe rocket pods are OP against everything.

I actually think Rocketpods are in a good spot against Infantry. But against MBT's and Lightnings, they're not even remotely in a good spot. I think it does have to do completely with the rear damage.

[Dragonskin]

IR smoke takes the place of the Magburner I believe, so.. yeah. You really think that's a good swap out?
Also, it doesn't take anywhere near a full clip to kill a tank, as it's extremely easy to get behind a tank when you're in the air. I think it's only 4 rounds of rocket pods to kill a tank from behind? Maybe 5? I know it's not anywhere near the full clip, as I do it every day now because it's the best XP in the game to farm tanks/lightnings currently. 90k/hr, using only rocket pods without double XP is not balanced O.o
Also, I'd love to see a Magrider hit 1/10 shots on an ESF. If a Magrider is even able to aim high enough to hit the ESF, than that pilot is a complete turd

Did I say use IR smoke and magburn? No I don't believe so. Tanks are nice exp.. my striker likes them, but from a exp standpoint sunderers are generally easier to kill due to lack of range to retaliate and they reward more exp per kill. So no.. most people aren't going around farming tanks for fast exp. Sunderers are and always have been the number 1 source of exp. They generate infantry kills and a high exp payout for vehicle destruction.

Look, I play with my prowler more than my mossie. You can look at my TR character if you want. I just don't see the justification even as a tanker. If you are getting you butt blown out by ESFs then you are likely solo and farming infantry kills so you didn't notice the ESF sound coming at you, or see the shadow on the ground or bother to move your butt before you died.

Wish I could look up the play times of people complaining about ESFs. I bet most of you rarely use a ESF to know exactly what it takes to pull off those kills and how easy it is to die as an ESF in the current game. Feel free to look up both of my characters. My VS has considerable ESF time logged.

[Binkley]

If you are VS you can magburn away from the damage and if you are NC you can pop your shield to negate the damage completely.

Does the Vanguard shield really reduce damage to zero? I don't think so, as I often drive a Vanguard and I get killed with my shield on all the time. I don't know what the actual numbers are, 1/2 damage? 3/4 damage? but it's not zero damage.


Speaking of crap no one uses. Who uses IR smoke? No one. Ever. Actually a few people have, but in my 9 days of playing time I can count on my hand how many times I have seen someone use IR smoke. I can't stand when people cry about getting killed with rockets in a tank.

I use IR smoke on my Lightning. It's very effective, but on the Vanguard it's a choice between the smoke or the shield and the shield is better. If you are a pilot you aren't going to see the smoke used very often because it's not an effective counter to air attack. The rockets that make me cry (LOLpods and AV Turrets) aren't effected by IR smoke, it really only works against the lock-ons. I see lots of magriders using IR smoke when I try to hit them with lock-ons.

[Dragonskin]

Does the Vanguard shield really reduce damage to zero? I don't think so, as I often drive a Vanguard and I get killed with my shield on all the time. I don't know what the actual numbers are, 1/2 damage? 3/4 damage? but it's not zero damage.



I use IR smoke on my Lightning. It's very effective, but on the Vanguard it's a choice between the smoke or the shield and the shield is better. If you are a pilot you aren't going to see the smoke used very often because it's not an effective counter to air attack. The rockets that make me cry (LOLpods and AV Turrets) aren't effected by IR smoke, it really only works against the lock-ons. I see lots of magriders using IR smoke when I try to hit them with lock-ons.

Again... I didn't say use the shield and IR smoke... just like I didn't suggest using magburner and IR smoke. I am fully aware of what IR smoke is used for and my striker loves some tank action because throwing a number out of my butt... 98% of tankers don't use IR smoke.

As far as the shield damage.... umm you can have the nanite repair, activate the shield and get hit while the nanite repair still works. As discussed in the video below. So what does that tell you about damage with shield up?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JnDkXMsockE

[Gimpylung]

Anyways, when you're finished ranting there Dragon.

Maarvy's idea seems reasonable and along the lines of original suggestion. It's the one pass kill I have issue with.

Getting rear loled is maddening sometimes , although its possible to avoid and out heal 1 lol podder and much easier to avoid in a magrider than any other mbt .

Let top armour cover the rear plate too so they can withstand 1 volley ... but only just .meaning a decent pilot will still finish you with his rotary if you dont react or repair real quick .

[Assist]

Did I say use IR smoke and magburn? No I don't believe so. Tanks are nice exp.. my striker likes them, but from a exp standpoint sunderers are generally easier to kill due to lack of range to retaliate and they reward more exp per kill. So no.. most people aren't going around farming tanks for fast exp. Sunderers are and always have been the number 1 source of exp. They generate infantry kills and a high exp payout for vehicle destruction.

Look, I play with my prowler more than my mossie. You can look at my TR character if you want. I just don't see the justification even as a tanker. If you are getting you butt blown out by ESFs then you are likely solo and farming infantry kills so you didn't notice the ESF sound coming at you, or see the shadow on the ground or bother to move your butt before you died.

Wish I could look up the play times of people complaining about ESFs. I bet most of you rarely use a ESF to know exactly what it takes to pull off those kills and how easy it is to die as an ESF in the current game. Feel free to look up both of my characters. My VS has considerable ESF time logged.

I have a good idea of what it takes, I never used to play the ESF because the tanks were simply too good at killing infantry. Since that has been fixed I hardly play the tank anymore, I play the ESF quite a bit now. I still don't play it a lot(compared to my playtime), but I do have 45 hours logged in it and 650 vehicles killed with it. Like I said though, I only recently bought the rocket pods so I don't have near the experience of others with it. But I do have 150 hours logged in my Magrider, so I am without a doubt more biased to it. (though I definitely have more hours in my ESF than MBT since mid January)

You're a bit off on the Sunderer statement. That used to be true, when farming infantry at a Sunderer was worthwhile, but it's not now. Sunderers are dangerous to air, because of the AA weapons on them. They also take 2 full sets(14 shots, 28 rockets) of rocket pods(or more?) to destroy, compared to a tank which is 4-5 shots(10 rockets). When the Sunderer used to be worth quite a bit more exp, plus the infantry kills, it was worthwhile to go after them. Now a lightning(with the driver) is the same xp as killing the Sunderer and rocket pods don't do near the splash damage to kill infantry. An MBT is worth even more, so for the same amount of ammunition you're looking at least double the exp(2 tanks), sometimes near triple(3 lightnings) that of killing the Sunderer.

[Dragonskin]

Anyways, when you're finished ranting there Dragon.

Maarvy's idea seems reasonable and along the lines of original suggestion. It's the one pass kill I have issue with.

Providing suggestions and ways to combat your problem with current in game solutions is now considered ranting? Interesting. By all means carry on.

[Gimpylung]

I perceived it as a derail if I'm honest as you proceeded to argue with everyone who you disagreed with and we appeared to be moving off the original topic with you ultimately linking a 13 minute Vanguard specific video centering around an anti-vehicle loadout and nanite auto repair which isn't particularly relevant to what was originally being discussed in my opinion.

But hey, it's your thread now, so carry on, bring it where you like.

[SolLeks]

One thing I hardly see come up is how the tank hitbox works

It is all biased off angles. If you come in at the right angle, and hit the front of the tank, it counts as rear damage. You should be able to test this by shooting the tip of the tank's barrel from different angels and getting different damage values from it.

this means, the entire top of the tank becomes 'rear damage' when shot at from a low 45º angle.

[Gimpylung]

Oh dear, if that's how it works then it certainly explains a lot. I suppose reducing the angle to 30º angle might help.

[maradine]

One thing I hardly see come up is how the tank hitbox works

It is all biased off angles. If you come in at the right angle, and hit the front of the tank, it counts as rear damage. You should be able to test this by shooting the tip of the tank's barrel from different angels and getting different damage values from it.

this means, the entire top of the tank becomes 'rear damage' when shot at from a low 45º angle.

Annoying, unrealistic, but allegedly necessary for performance reasons. Personally, they've already done the clipping detection to count the hit, so presumably they already have the intersection coordinates in memory, but . . .

nanites.

[Dragonskin]

I perceived it as a derail if I'm honest as you proceeded to argue with everyone who you disagreed with and we appeared to be moving off the original topic with you ultimately linking a 13 minute Vanguard specific video centering around an anti-vehicle loadout and nanite auto repair which isn't particularly relevant to what was originally being discussed in my opinion.

But hey, it's your thread now, so carry on, bring it where you like.

So... the issue is that ESFs blow up tanks too fast. Right?

So I offered the following solutions.

1. get a 2nd player to be gunner because default gun damages everything
2. change the default gun to a walker or ranger that is AA specific
3. be more situationally aware
4. use top armor and move forward or backward so that missile hit the top armor
5. use magburner or shield to move out of danger so you don't die
6. use rival chassis so that you are more manuverable so that you can move your rear away from danger faster.

And some how that derails the conversation? IR smoke wasn't related I will give you that. Everything else is very related. As well as questioning your experience with ESFs to know exactly how difficult it is to blow up a tank.. which is the very reason this thread exists in the first place.

[Assist]

So... the issue is that ESFs blow up tanks too fast. Right?

So I offered the following solutions.

1. get a 2nd player to be gunner because default gun damages everything
2. change the default gun to a walker or ranger that is AA specific
3. be more situationally aware
4. use top armor and move forward or backward so that missile hit the top armor
5. use magburner or shield to move out of danger so you don't die
6. use rival chassis so that you are more manuverable so that you can move your rear away from danger faster.

And some how that derails the conversation? IR smoke wasn't related I will give you that. Everything else is very related. As well as questioning your experience with ESFs to know exactly how difficult it is to blow up a tank.. which is the very reason this thread exists in the first place.

1. 2. 3. I use the AA on top now, because I have to. That doesn't prevent me from exploding to rocket pods, they will out damage a single AA on a tank any day.

4. I've used top armor since release, Magrider.

5. I use Magburner, generally you barely have time to react to rocket pods hitting you in the rear. Even if you do react, you're going to be dead when the ESF spins around because you're at least half health from the original volley

6. I use rival chassis, it's the only one worth while for the Magrider.


Preventative measures don't change the damage of the rocketpods to the rear of the tank. If your argument is that you can circumvent the damage, sure you can. You could always not spawn the tank and that solves that issue, but that's not what this topic is about.
This topic is about the damage of rocket pods to the rear of the tank, per the title of the thread.

[Gimpylung]

So... the issue is that ESFs blow up tanks too fast. Right?

Nope, I refer to a specific rear attack with pods, not general ESF/EST balance.

Thanks for the lesson in GENERAL battlefield survivability.

All your points are sound advice from the Tanking 101 Handbook. I read it 8 years ago.

All your points are relevant generally for most kinds of attacks but are irrelevant with regard to the specific kind of attack to which I originally refer. That is the exact reason why I created this thread.

I am not referring to isolated 1v1 encounters as you originally assumed.

Read all my posts again, pay specific attention to my reference to 2nd AA gunners.

If magburn worked in reverse it would be a solution, as the last place I need to be is further in front of the ESF.

You appreciate how quick this attack is and how I don't have rear view mirrors and the that ESFs can be in and out of minimap and render range in seconds.

With regard to my own personal ESF flight experience, I will defer to Predator4 and Assists experience as described in this thread. I will also take into account the experiences of other experienced pilots with whom I've discussed this issue. Many of them seem to refer to pods as lolpods for some unexplained reason, sure wasn't tankers that christened them that.

And again, I will ask you to consider what I'm requesting. A slight optional enhancement to top or rear armour so that 1 pass of pods can be survived by those that have chosen that armour at the cost of something else.

[maradine]

When a rocket ESF catches a tank unawares at a good angle, it blows up the tank. When a tank catches anything unawares at a good angle, it blows up anything. Soooooo what's the issue here?

[Sir B Smythe]

I guess the issue is its damn hard to hit aircraft with either of the guns normally mounted on a magrider, slow rounds and useless elevation. Oh and yes I hate rocket pods too. That's why I take great delight in shooting down aircraft when I have the chance as I believe them to be the scourge of Planetside 2.

[Gimpylung]

When a rocket ESF catches a tank unawares at a good angle, it blows up the tank. When a tank catches anything unawares at a good angle, it blows up anything. Soooooo what's the issue here?

In fairness Maradine, I think the ESF's have a few more options in the 'blowing up anything' stakes than tanks do.

[Assist]

When a rocket ESF catches a tank unawares at a good angle, it blows up the tank. When a tank catches anything unawares at a good angle, it blows up anything. Soooooo what's the issue here?

I'd agree with you, except when a tank catches another tank unawares at a good angle, it doesn't kill it nearly as fast as rocket pods when hitting a tank in the rear. I'd venture to guess it takes twice as long for a tank to kill another tank hitting it in the rear as it takes for rocket pods to kill a tank in the rear.

[Dragonskin]

I'd agree with you, except when a tank catches another tank unawares at a good angle, it doesn't kill it nearly as fast as rocket pods when hitting a tank in the rear. I'd venture to guess it takes twice as long for a tank to kill another tank hitting it in the rear as it takes for rocket pods to kill a tank in the rear.

I would like to see a comparision as well. Not that I think you are wrong, but to know exactly what the difference is. I think it could take more time to kill a tank with a tank in the rear.. except for prowlers.

[SolLeks]

Annoying, unrealistic, but allegedly necessary for performance reasons. Personally, they've already done the clipping detection to count the hit, so presumably they already have the intersection coordinates in memory, but . . .

nanites.

well, if its true that they can not fix it, I vote they get rid of 'rear damage' for tanks.

[maradine]

I would like to see a comparision as well. Not that I think you are wrong, but to know exactly what the difference is. I think it could take more time to kill a tank with a tank in the rear.. except for prowlers.

It's probably closer to 3-4x. I also don't see it as an issue. Tank-on-tank TTK is actually the anomaly here when you look at the rest of the ecosystem. I'm not saying that's good or bad - just that it's consistent.

[Binkley]

As far as the shield damage.... umm you can have the nanite repair, activate the shield and get hit while the nanite repair still works. As discussed in the video below. So what does that tell you about damage with shield up?


The Vanguard shield doesn't block infinite damage, it absorbs 3000hp. A Vanguard with its shield up dies in less than one volley of photon pods (12 of 14), when hit in the rear ( the same with Hellfire rocket pods ), one volley, 2.4 seconds TTK.

http://www.ps2calc.com/#vehicle1=Vanguard+Shielded&weapon1=Photon+Pods

[Binkley]

I would like to see a comparision as well. Not that I think you are wrong, but to know exactly what the difference is. I think it could take more time to kill a tank with a tank in the rear.. except for prowlers.

As I wrote in another post before I read the above, TTK a shielded Vanguard from the rear for Photon pods is 2.37s. For a Prowler with HEAT it's 7.5s, with AP 7s. Those times assume that the Vanguard is shielded at the start of the attack and the shield's timer doesn't expire. Best case, a Magrider with AP and a secondary Saron with all hits in the rear kills the shielded Vanguard in 3.75s.

My source is www.ps2calc.com

[Dragonskin]

As I wrote in another post before I read the above, TTK a shielded Vanguard from the rear for Photon pods is 2.37s. For a Prowler with HEAT it's 7.5s, with AP 7s. Those times assume that the Vanguard is shielded at the start of the attack and the shield's timer doesn't expire. Best case, a Magrider with AP and a secondary Saron with all hits in the rear kills the shielded Vanguard in 3.75s.

My source is www.ps2calc.com

I thought your edit button was broken, but you edited this post.

[Varsam]

It could be simply done by adding wide rear flaps to top armor.

If it should be done is an entirely different question. Attacking a vehicle from behind is a skill-based tactic. I don't fly very often as I generally prefer infantry combat over vehicle combat but from my experience in the VR training area I can tell it's a pretty hard thing to pull off. This game is already not very skill-heavy with too many random things to factor in and you are suggesting to remove one of the few skill-based factors.

I am personally with you on this one, but then again I'd support any rocketpod nerf just because I think we need more skill-based weapons for aircraft and more of them in general with distinct roles for each. Rocketpods shouldn't be the only viable thing when you are equipping your ESF. I expect many pilots will object to this though.

I fly quite a bit, and I agree wholeheartedly. Rocket podding (particularly tanks from behind) aided greatly in my ascent to BR59, and I feel that rear damage bonus for aircraft is unnecessary. This is coming from a Vanu, who have the worst incarnation of rocket pods of the three factions. As far as it being a skill-based tactic... there's no huge skill involved in attacking the bright red brake lights on a vehicle when you can move in three dimensions and you travel at 200+ km/h.

The claim that undefended vehicles deserve the fate they currently get is ridiculous. For one thing, if they're undefended they're going to die regardless, even if the rear armor bonus didn't exist. It'll just take 2 or 3 rocket runs instead of just one. For another, "properly defended armor" has never stopped me or any of my outfitmates from ramming rockets up tanks' asses, even with multiple flak units and any number of lock-on launchers in the area. Smart pilots do 3 things: they use terrain cover, they carry flairs, and they never stop moving. These things combined with an ESF's natural speed and maneuverability mean that I can choose literally any attack vector I want. It is exceedingly easy to choose a vector that lines up squarely with the rear of a tank, and I'm on site for such a short amount of time that flak and launcher units simply do not have enough time to down me (unless they see me coming first, which is my mistake).

People who defend rocket pod's effectiveness against tanks (and in general) are most likely simply addicted to their universal effectiveness. I am too, but at least I'm not going to lie to myself about it.

[Thunderhawk]

You obviously don't play on a server that is full of people that know how to incorporate AA into their Squad and platoon makeups....

I'm sorry, but the AA state of the game renders all these arguments pointless.

[Gimpylung]

Punish the Tanks because flyers perceive AA to be OP?

[Rolfski]

I agree with OP, taking out a tank in one volley feels lame while doing it and is just frustrating to be on the end of it.

And don't give me this situational awareness crap. This game is so chaotic that many times, you just won't see it coming, no matter how skilled of a tanker you are. And having you tank permanently manned by an AA gunner is just not how this game works. Lone wolves won't find themselves a tank gunner easily and even within outfit play that's not always the case.

As for the pilot side, it certainly takes practise but once you are a skilled pilot and know when to engage or bail out, you can farm like nobodies business. It's not even funny. Check out some of the YouTube channels of good pilots and you get my point.

[Dragonskin]

Check out some of the YouTube channels of good pilots and you get my point.

Sure, please everyone take this advice. Go find footage of people farming 50-100 people in ESFs in the current game. I want to see videos of this with in the last update that came out with the ESAVs. I would be interested to see if anyone can find some amazing footage post AA updates across the board which includes the new Striker.

[Gimpylung]

If you are having trouble as a flyer with the new ESAV then I suggest switching to TR then that problem is solved. But thats a story for a flyboy thread which won't involve me.

I think flyers would be wise not to moan about ESAV in a thread about tank durability.

So we'll just not mention them here anymore.

[Thunderhawk]

We're not (or at least I'm not) trying to use AA as an excuse per se. I am trying to say that Planetside 2 is - last I checked - a combined arms game, and you cannot put an ESF in a vacuum with a MBT then start wanting things nerfed.

Sure, if we were on the field with ESF vs MBT and nothing else around, then yes the lolpods are stupid when it comes to TTK on MBTs, I am first one to agree that it is the case, but in game, whilst playing it, an ESF cannot decimate an entire Tank column, an ESF cannot go around killing all MBTs without fearing for being locked / flacked / shot at with small arms fire (trust me it hurts).....

All you have to do is turn, strafe, move BACKWARDS, move Forwards, anything.....

And... if you are in your tank and get instagibbed by an ESF, it had to have been able to land an entire volley for it to "blow up"....meaning nothing was locking, shooting, flacking, looking at it funny for it to do so.

Rough idea of numbers, out of 10 (different) ESF vs MBT encounters:-

3 MBTs will be instagibbed
5 MBTs will be severely damaged, but repairable, whilst the ESF flees (being shot at)
2 MBTs would have shot down the ESF if they had AA guns on them, AND A 2nd GUNNER (something you guys fail to mention is that having AI main gun and AV secondary gun means you made a decision to be vulnerable to air.

------------------

Now if they decide to NERF the Lolpods so it takes 2 Volleys to kill a Tank in the rear, then I would not be upset by that either, players would adapt, game styles will change, but I am just tried of the constant ESF debate that constantly ensues whenever someone doesn't like dying in a game where you are meant to kill and be killed.

[Gimpylung]

I never asked for anything to be nerfed.

I'll quote my own original post...

Maybe, modify top armour so that it also increases rear protection from pods specifically. That might make top armour a worthwhile addition to a tank again, it was only ever somewhat justifiable to use when libs were OP and the sky was black with them.

Net effect, SOME tanks that have chosen top armour are a bit harder for lolpodders to gank. A choice.

Jeez, you flyboys perceive everything as NERF NERF NERF when it comes to your precious single seater ESF. You tell me to be more situationally aware and have 2 AA sundies flanking my mag and work as a team.

Meanwhile you fly around solowhoring with the ability to attack anything that moves and then cry when you are denied a kill and had to fly away coz some flak spammed you.

But I love you really Thunder :D

[Thunderhawk]

I never asked for anything to be nerfed.

I'll quote my own original post...



Net effect, SOME tanks that have chosen top armour are a bit harder for lolpodders to gank. A choice.

Jeez, you flyboys perceive everything as NERF NERF NERF when it comes to your precious single seater ESF. You tell me to be more situationally aware and have 2 AA sundies flanking my mag and work as a team.

Meanwhile you fly around solowhoring with the ability to attack anything that moves and then cry when you are denied a kill and had to fly away coz some flak spammed you.

But I love you really Thunder :D

I love you too man, I know this isn't personal ;) - We're talking in game mechanics ;)

[snafus]

Punish the Tanks because flyers perceive AA to be OP?

No but if you leave armor exposed or unprotected it will be destroyed quite easily. This is a combined arms game, you can't balance everything from the 1v1 perspective. If you actually have some kind of AA in the area or simply your friendly armor just turns their guns in the direction of the ESF approach you have effectively stopped that threat. I personally get insta gibbed quite regularly by enemy armor that I didn't notice when I came in on a supposed solo MBT. There are so many ways to eliminate air atm it is ridiculous, use these assets with your armor and the problem will be fixed.

[Dragonskin]

We're not (or at least I'm not) trying to use AA as an excuse per se. I am trying to say that Planetside 2 is - last I checked - a combined arms game, and you cannot put an ESF in a vacuum with a MBT then start wanting things nerfed.

^ This. You guys want to keep going the 1v1 route. If you are in a tank by yourself... ei. no gunner.. and a ESF blows up your butt. You deserved it.

Tanks have much less to fear than ESFs do. Rocketpods were actually designed to hit ground vehicles.. not kill infantry like everyone thinks. You have 1 weak spot on a tank.. the rear. Knowing you have a weak spot in the rear means you should be watching your butt as much as possible to make sure you don't put it in an exposed situation.

No but if you leave armor exposed or unprotected it will be destroyed quite easily. This is a combined arms game, you can't balance everything from the 1v1 perspective. If you actually have some kind of AA in the area or simply your friendly armor just turns their guns in the direction of the ESF approach you have effectively stopped that threat. I personally get insta gibbed quite regularly by enemy armor that I didn't notice when I came in on a supposed solo MBT. There are so many ways to eliminate air atm it is ridiculous, use these assets with your armor and the problem will be fixed.

He doesn't want to use anything to protect him. This is a solo 1v1 war he is waging. He can't be bothered to get help. All I have to say is at least this isn't PS1 because then you would need a 2nd person just to shoot anything unless you wanted to stay completely still while you shoot.

Anyway, this keeps going in a circular argument. Just like the Scatmax thread. I don't think any new ground is being covered.

[PredatorFour]

I play on a busy server, Miller. It ain't hard to fly into a enemy zone with combined arms and stay alive. Keep low as always, gank the tank from behind which is near instant and get the hell out and repair. Most of the time i get hit is where i'm stupid enough to keep coming back to the same spot and then get ganked by a heavies rocket. It is really easy like Varsam said to kill tanks in an ESF.

Giving more protection to a tanks rear from air is going to help... a little. It's not like some revolutionary game changing effect as they will still die, but maybe live for 7 seconds longer.

[Gimpylung]

I find it amusing that the flyers continue to talk about combined arms.

I don't see too many of you flying in formation working together.

My point is that lolpodders can gank EVEN IF I'm in cover and not exposed. The attack is too fast, I cannot respond to it. Can we quit talking about this 1v1 rubbish.

Tanks should have a weakspot at the rear, its far far far far too weak.

I will reiterate and clarify for the umpteenth time.

Modify tank top armour so that those that choose to use it can survive 1 rear attack from lolpods.

Let me pop that into Google Translate and select Flyboyish

NERF NERF NERF LOLPODS, BUFF AA, STAHP DEM HAVING FUN, RUIN THE GAME FOR DEM

Oh dear, I see whats happening

[Dragonskin]

I find it amusing that the flyers continue to talk about combined arms.

I don't see too many of you flying in formation working together.

My point is that lolpodders can gank EVEN IF I'm in cover and not exposed. The attack is too fast, I cannot respond to it. Can we quit talking about this 1v1 rubbish.

Tanks should have a weakspot at the rear, its far far far far too weak.

I will reiterate and clarify for the umpteenth time.

Modify tank top armour so that those that choose to use it can survive 1 rear attack from lolpods.

Let me pop that into Google Translate and select Flyboyish



Oh dear, I see whats happening

1. I will stop bringing up 1v1 when you stop calling anyone with an opposing opinion a flyer.

2. I don't see many MBTs fully crewed. It's usually 1 person and they normally have a AP secondary because they double as AI as well as doing damage to armor.

3. you can 1 shot ESFs with the primary weapon. You can have a 2nd gunner for dedicated AA.

4. As someone that plays with tanks as much as air vehicles. I disagree. The weakspot is fine due to how well MBTs can deal with enemies other than tanks.

5. No one will use top armor because everyone is scared of mines anyway. Just like no one uses IR smoke even though lock-on rockets are pretty scary. Especially aimed at the MBTs rear.

I'll add to this. You don't mention liberators at all even though they can do the same thing from a further distance and does anyone know if the bug to fire 4 missiless at the same time still exists? Because that could lead to these surprise buttsex reports you are complaining about. That is a separate issue entirely. For those that didn't know about it.. you used to be able to switch from you primary gun on ESF while holding the fire button down and when it switched to rocketpods you would get a double fire of rockets. Meaning 4 rockets fired at the same time.

I haven't used that in awhile to know if it still works that way.

[Lafen]

Tons of undead AA MAX's with Engineer and Medic support but there is still a chance to kill a tank ?

Love it.

[Gimpylung]

1. Fair enuf, scouts honour.

2. Mine is fully crewed unless its 3am then it might not be due to pops.

3. Irelevent, I'm talking about ganking, I'm dead before these tactics are relevent.

4. I disagree, think thats why we having this debate.

5. So you are objecting to what so precisely, the choice?

You move on to broader issues beyond the scope of my issue personally.

You are right it is circular, this thread, but hell, its passing the time :D

[Dragonskin]

I don't think the option is warranted and I don't think enough people would use it to justify the man hours to create the option.

Your top armor issue aside. I am more interested now to see if the bug still exists for firing missiles. Because if that bug is still around then fixing that 1 thing could get you valued reaction time making your change unnecessary because your whole reason for the change is based on TTK being too high on rocketpods hitting your butt.

[snafus]

I was never an ESF pilot, and never bought rocket pods until two weeks ago because I always found them cheap. I bought them because I was tired of getting killed by ESF's in one pass, so I figured I may as well join the crowd and become a lame-ass like the rest of the rocketpod scrubs.

Having them now, seeing how difficult it is to use them and shoot a tank in the ass, I have to say that they're even easier than I ever imagined.

I seriously hope they nerf rocketpods into the ground even more. I can make a pass at full speed and take out a tank, with 0 chance of being destroyed as long as my flares are up. In most cases two bursters wouldn't even have a chance to kill me, unless it was my 3rd/4th/5th pass in a row. But as it is right now, the rocketpods to a tank are the equivilent of a shotgun to the face. No warning, ridiculous reward, and 0 threat unless you overstay your welcome.

Takes 44 rounds of burster fire to kill a fully certed comp armor ESF. Those bursters that were shooting at you failed indeed. Or simply weren't pulling security as they should have been.

[maradine]

Agreed. When bursters are properly target calling, we usually get the kill before the ESF volley is complete. They certainly don't get out for a second pass. But then, we take flak a little more seiously than most. :D

I'd imagine the local equation is very different from server to server.

[snafus]

Agreed. When bursters are properly target calling, we usually get the kill before the ESF volley is complete. They certainly don't get out for a second pass. But then, we take flak a little more seiously than most. :D

I'd imagine the local equation is very different from server to server.

Yes I do imagine that it can vary upon outfit and overall community. There are plenty of people on Connery that will allow you to farm them with air and do nothing but fire back with small arms fire. I have seen some of those same individuals makes post on how air is OP.

[Kirotan]

Ok, so question time:

Tank drivers:

1. How many times per day do you get surprise rocket podded and lose your tank to it?

2. When you get surprise rocket podded, how often does this happen while you are in a group with air cover/AA presence?

3. What % of your tank deaths come from being rocket podded?


Pilots:

1. What % of your MBT kills come from picking off tanks in smaller battles or on the perimeter of larger ones?

2. Which of these statements do you more strongly agree with? A) Most of my MBT kills occur because the tank driver made an error in judgment or B) Most of my MBT kills occur because the tank driver is just unlucky.

I feel like neither side understands the other. "You don't know what it's like to be rocket podded in the rear of your tank and die almost instantly!" and "You don't know what it's like to fly within 500m of a base and suddenly have everyone shooting at you!"

Infantry: "Hey! Both of you have no idea what it's like to die instantly to nearly everything that shoots at you within 500m!"

Pilots and Tankers, together: "SHUTUP, INFANTRY!"

[Dragonskin]

Ok, so question time:

Tank drivers:

1. How many times per day do you get surprise rocket podded and lose your tank to it?

2. When you get surprise rocket podded, how often does this happen while you are in a group with air cover/AA presence?

3. What % of your tank deaths come from being rocket podded?


Pilots:

1. What % of your MBT kills come from picking off tanks in smaller battles or on the perimeter of larger ones?

2. Which of these statements do you more strongly agree with? A) Most of my MBT kills occur because the tank driver made an error in judgment or B) Most of my MBT kills occur because the tank driver is just unlucky.

I feel like neither side understands the other. "You don't know what it's like to be rocket podded in the rear of your tank and die almost instantly!" and "You don't know what it's like to fly within 500m of a base and suddenly have everyone shooting at you!"

Infantry: "Hey! Both of you have no idea what it's like to die instantly to nearly everything that shoots at you within 500m!"

Pilots and Tankers, together: "SHUTUP, INFANTRY!"

Tankers
1. 0-1, I usually die to lock-on rockets or mines

2. The only times I have been surprised buttsexed by a ESF pilot are when there aren't many allies around or if there is a noticeable lack of ally AA around. Usually if I do get surprised buttsexed.. then people will start pulling AA to deal with the ESF.

3. 2% or less. It's a rare.

Pilots:
1. 50-60% of my tank kills are solo tanks usually on the outskirts of a larger battle.

2. This is a loaded question. I would go with a little of A and B. The tank driver is partially unlucky because he may have been trying to get to the large battle or he made a error by sticking to the outskirts trying to pick off infantry or sunderers on the outskirts of battles.

For the last 3 weeks I have been mostly a ground pounder.. so yea.. every vehicle that looks at me is potential death.

[Kirotan]

If you have a suggestion for replacing the loaded question on the pilot side I would gladly take it. Not that I expect this survey to gain traction, nor do I wish it to completely derail the discussion.

I guess I have 2 main points:

1. The tank questions are asked to make tank operators stop and think, "Do I really get rocketpodded that much?" I think that it happens more rarely than most think. Unlike other deaths, however, it is more memorable because the manner in which your tank dies leaves it as a more memorable event in your mind. Think about it; unlike other ways you can die in a tank (vs. other tanks, c4, mines, AV, can all be reduced and mitigated by smart tank play), dying to a strafing run to the rear armor is a sudden process that leaves a tanker in a situation where he has little to no control over his fate. I honestly believe that most tankers rarely die to rocket podding; it is the rage that rocket podding causes that makes it insufferable to many, even if it only happens once a day.

2. The best way to prevent your tank from being rocket podded is by having friendly air cover and/or AA. Sad I know that you will have to depend on others, but that's the way the current Air/AA game is setup. Air will go where there is the least amount of AA to stop them.

edit: deleted stuff not really relevant to the conversation. something about flying or whatnot.

[KUKUGUY]

I think rocket pods kills a tank too fast
I don't even have time to activate my vanguard shield

[Rolfski]

Sure, please everyone take this advice. Go find footage of people farming 50-100 people in ESFs in the current game. I want to see videos of this with in the last update that came out with the ESAVs. I would be interested to see if anyone can find some amazing footage post AA updates across the board which includes the new Striker.
This guy is one of the better flyers out there on Miller and even he thinks A2G is out of balance:

Planetside 2 - Pilots POV - Balance, suggestions and eSports - YouTube

The ESLR update didn't do much for G2A because of the time it tales to lock/fly to target. Decent pilots just won't give you that time.

[Varsam]

You obviously don't play on a server that is full of people that know how to incorporate AA into their Squad and platoon makeups....

I'm sorry, but the AA state of the game renders all these arguments pointless.

"I'm sorry", but making sweeping dismissals and then lamely pointing to "the AA state of the game" without any other validification isn't exactly convincing.

We're not (or at least I'm not) trying to use AA as an excuse per se. I am trying to say that Planetside 2 is - last I checked - a combined arms game, and you cannot put an ESF in a vacuum with a MBT then start wanting things nerfed.

Sure, if we were on the field with ESF vs MBT and nothing else around, then yes the lolpods are stupid when it comes to TTK on MBTs, I am first one to agree that it is the case, but in game, whilst playing it, an ESF cannot decimate an entire Tank column, an ESF cannot go around killing all MBTs without fearing for being locked / flacked / shot at with small arms fire (trust me it hurts).....

All you have to do is turn, strafe, move BACKWARDS, move Forwards, anything.....

And... if you are in your tank and get instagibbed by an ESF, it had to have been able to land an entire volley for it to "blow up"....meaning nothing was locking, shooting, flacking, looking at it funny for it to do so.

Rough idea of numbers, out of 10 (different) ESF vs MBT encounters:-

3 MBTs will be instagibbed
5 MBTs will be severely damaged, but repairable, whilst the ESF flees (being shot at)
2 MBTs would have shot down the ESF if they had AA guns on them, AND A 2nd GUNNER (something you guys fail to mention is that having AI main gun and AV secondary gun means you made a decision to be vulnerable to air.

------------------

Now if they decide to NERF the Lolpods so it takes 2 Volleys to kill a Tank in the rear, then I would not be upset by that either, players would adapt, game styles will change, but I am just tried of the constant ESF debate that constantly ensues whenever someone doesn't like dying in a game where you are meant to kill and be killed.

The ESF is the single most powerful tool in the game, because it enables a single player to effectively combat ANY other threat in the game. It is an undeniably powerful vehicle, so of course it needs constant tweaking to balance its relationship to other factors in this game. And where did you get those numbers? They're completely arbitrary.

[Mietz]

People, don't forget that an ESF has -two- weapons available to one person.

I think I explained this before in the many many ESF threads pre-launch and people use it quite frequently.

Pods can indeed have a TTK of 3-7 seconds depending on faction, however the missiles have also travel time, they do not move as fast as shells for example.
How this works is this:

You unload a complete volley of missiles in your approach and then you switch to your main gun while the first missiles start to impact and the last missiles are in flight. This works on ranges around +200m.
The reaction of the driver starts with the first missile impact, not with your first missile fired. Even if you manage to magburn on the 1/3 clip point (~1 second), the ESF can -still- blow you up by using its main gun.

If you watch pilot vids you will notice that almost all of them swtich to primary after they fired their last missile.
You are able to deliver simultaneous damage from both primary and pods in the last third of your pod-clip (this doesn't work that good with the Photonpods because of their fire-mechanism).

This is what makes the TTK shorter than it should be.
If as an MBT I had the ability to switch to my primary turret without losing control over my tank, I would certainly have a better TTK. Imagine Prowler unloads his two shells, goes into reload, and while that is happening I unload with the Halberd/Gatling (all the while controlling my movement and attack vector), etc.
But even then it wouldn't be the same thing as shells travel far faster and the driver has the duration of my reload-time to react to the second volley. Just imagine lightnings having a forward Basilisk or sth.

ESF pods are "continuous" when they are unloaded, they do not provide enough time in-between impacts to react and so you eat more than half the clip before you can go into evasive.

Now a second gunner in your MBT can help you to scare off the ESF a bit and give you forewarning, but with all the available attack-vectors on an MBT in this game its almost impossible to actually make this consistent. Also the question remains, what about Lightnings?
Everything and your mother can kill or severely damage an MBT/Lightning (HA missiles, Mines, C4, Turrets, other tanks/lightnings, sunderers, even flashes, liberators and finally ESF).

The argument that this is a combined arms game works both ways.
If you say that we should have this and that support, you have to understand that the enemy ESF -has its own support- in the form of ground troops that will also try to kill the MBT.
Yes its combined arms, and the combined arms means its not ESF vs MBT 1v1, but it also doesn't mean ESF vs MBT + AA sup. because the ESF has its own friends.
In the end the balance -must be- considered in 1v1 because the game is combined arms, which means that the arms are combined, always, and hence the situation is always "with X support" FOR BOTH UNITS.

Its unreasonable to state that an MBT got killed because it didn't have AA support just like its unreasonable to state an ESF got killed because it didn't have ground support.
Justifying your argument by saying "you should have had X support" is implying the ESF didn't need X to succeed but the other side did.
In effect that would imply that the ESF is imbalanced as it can operate without X in a combined arms game.
Is that what you are saying?
Think again.

[Kirotan]

This guy is one of the better flyers out there on Miller and even he thinks A2G is out of balance:

The ESLR update didn't do much for G2A because of the time it tales to lock/fly to target. Decent pilots just won't give you that time.

Much like this guy, Assist also posted earlier that rocket pods were a little too easy.

Here's the problem: While their opinions are highly respected, it's probably not wise to balance things based on the skills of very good players.

You wouldn't nerf MBTs because 1% of the player base can snipe infantry and shoot aircraft out of the sky from 300+ meters, and you shouldn't nerf liberators because 1% of the players can farm and destroy anything that comes their way.

The ESF is the single most powerful tool in the game, because it enables a single player to effectively combat ANY other threat in the game. It is an undeniably powerful vehicle, so of course it needs constant tweaking to balance its relationship to other factors in this game. And where did you get those numbers? They're completely arbitrary.

It is ONLY the single most powerful tool in the game as long as the player has the skill to use it. Its lethality depends more on the pilots ability than any other vehicle in the game does.

[igster]

The biggest issue is that the ESF is in complete control of their situation 100% of the time. Give me a situation where the ESF cannot either compete against their opponent in a dog fight or avoid a situation which threatens their aircraft.

A2A ESF - dogfight it or run away.
Skyguard/Burster - run away or take it out... your call depending upon your assessment of the situation. They are a threat but can very easily be avoided.
Ground vehicles/Turrets - Free Kill
Infantry - Free Kill

Any other vehicle or infantry does not have these options. No matter how skilled a player you are - there are many situations where you have no option but to be killed. Vehicles get caught out in the map and do not have the mobility to escape or evade - they are not fast enough.

Same goes for infantry - vehicles and aircraft have much higher mobility so they are the most rooted to their location with the fewest options.

Ground Vehicles have a better chance to escape and evade infantry and an even chance against other vehicles.

Air Vehicles are at the top of the food chain in terms of capacity to escape and evade any threats. It's definitely a skilled role but even an unskilled pilot is to a large extent in control of whether he exposes himself to losing the aircraft.

This is why the aircraft is the lone wolf option. It's the reason why the high k/d ratio players tend to be pilots. They can operate completely independently and dominate areas of the map without any significant risk of resistance. Anything comes into that area of the map they can normally kill it and if not, they have the mobility to escape and evade to a safe area or alternatively have a good chance of fighting their counter.

Of course squad play and formation of armored columns with protections changes all of this and gives you protection. However, around the fringes of the battle, the lone wolf aircraft are the top of the food chain. If a squad or faction do not have the appropriate protection in place then the ESFs will completely dominate.

It is extremely boring playing the Anti-aircraft role in this game, but very exciting playing the ESF role. This is the source of the imbalance. Most people don't want to be staring at the sky hoping for stupid lonewolf air crews to come into their area. This is why there are generally not enough AA crews.
The ground based Anti-Air crews are too rooted to an area. They are also very vulnerable to all threats and so need a lot of protection. They can't operate in lone wolf fashion because they are very fragile.

PS1 Reavers were very similar but the ground forces had better anti air options. With the rocket pod angles, they mostly had to expose themselves to being shot at to rocket spam vehicles and infantry. The TTK with the rockets meant that taking out any vehicle exposed them to some risk.
In PS2, there is no such risk. ESF pilots can attack ground forces at angles where there is no risk of retaliation. The TTK is very low even without the rear armor damage multiplier.

My solution - raise the max angle of the ground vehicle turrets by 5-10% and keep your 240% rear armor bonus damage.

Alternatively remove 240% rear armor damage from aircraft against ground vehicles.

[Binkley]

Ok, so question time:

Tank drivers:

1. How many times per day do you get surprise rocket podded and lose your tank to it?

2. When you get surprise rocket podded, how often does this happen while you are in a group with air cover/AA presence?

3. What % of your tank deaths come from being rocket podded?



1. Never counted, but many times. I fare well in tank vs. tank and tank vs. infantry battles. ESFs are a primary source of death.

2. Almost never. With AA cover, lots of eye on the sky, and multiple targets for the ESF to choose from, it's very very rare that they get me. In a group, there are always going to be easier/juicier targets.

3. I estimate my tank dies to ESFs 40%, to infantry 40%, and to enemy armor + turrets 20%. ESF and surprise C4 attacks are my biggest fears.

I usually run my MBT with AP secondary, less often AI, AA never. An AA secondary is, at best, able to scare off ESFs, but will rarely get any kills. Thus nobody really wants to gun with that, and it seems a good ESF pilot can shrug off the AA gun and kill me anyway. I accept a certain amount of death from above when I run solo without an AA gun. It's the price to pay for being highly effective against enemy armor and infantry.

I think perhaps it should take an ESF more than one pass to kill me, but if it did take two or more passes, I would escape death by fleeing/repair often and that might unbalance things in the tanks' favor. I mean, I don't like lolpods the same way that I don't like pump shotguns, insta-death is never fun and doesn't feel "fair" when you are on the receiving end.

[Lonehunter]

...as rocketpodders are exploiting the weak rear armour mechanic ...

They're not exploiting anything... In the battlefields of PS2 waiting till the tank in your sights turns around or taking the time to position yourself correctly you've either A: Became an easier target to kill or B:Wasted time doing this and could have started searching for the next target.

I doubt people would actually wait for a tank to turn before firing rockets, because you're just focusing your attention without being offensive. So making yourself vulnerable without payoff. Most likely hovering, which is also horrible.

So if you take the time to fly around, which could be a giant half circle or more if the tank keeps moving with you, but even a quick flip is time wasted. You're doing even worse, making yourself a target and showing every enemy who can see you fly that you are a distracted easy target.

I'm not even gonna mention just flying up and the tank's ass happen to be facing you. To me that's a whole different argument about situational awareness more drivers need to have.

But My point is,
*It's a legitimate strategy that if a pilot chooses to follow he's likely making himself more vulnerable to do so.

*If you were "ganked" and instantly fired upon in that area as soon as he was in range, then you are not living up to your full potential as a driver. You need to know where threats are, where threats could be coming from and where is safe to retreat.

*You also seem to be forgetting about the different empire's benefits. The only vehicular manifestations of this are MBTs and ESFs. TR moves faster, VS has more maneuverability, and NC are supposed to pack the most in each punch and the most survivability (even though the Vanguard and Reaver have the same total health, and the reaver has no Shield like the vanguard.) Removing this factor in AvG only limits the game.

*You also seem to be forgetting THIS IS PLANETSIDE! It's a FPS MMO. No other game has a higher chance of random death then this. It's war, it's battles, it's bugs, it's lag, it's lack of attention span, it's unpredictable.

[igster]

You see 2 tanks fighting on the ground. You pass it by then come back knowing that the tanks on the ground will be facing each other and you know the direction they will be facing.
You can come in from any angle using any terrain including coming in from a very high angle of attack if theres any particular danger (and the occupants of the tank cant even see you because they have the most limited visibility in the game)

Is it really situational awareness that is the issue or is it that the fastest, most manoeverable vehicles in the game which also have the luxury of being able to use the z-axis also get given a 'free kill' card given the opportunity to hit a ground armoured unit in the rear?

There is a reason aircraft don't take additional damage from the rear - and it is because it is too easy for other aircraft to hit them from the rear.

So is it even harder to hit a vehicle that is stuck to the terrain from the rear? Not on the planet I live on.

The ESF crews get given all of the trump cards. And then they also get given the lowest TTK for any vehicle. Honestly - they kill tanks quicker than liberators which is so, so wrong.

[Varsam]

Much like this guy, Assist also posted earlier that rocket pods were a little too easy.

Here's the problem: While their opinions are highly respected, it's probably not wise to balance things based on the skills of very good players.

You wouldn't nerf MBTs because 1% of the player base can snipe infantry and shoot aircraft out of the sky from 300+ meters, and you shouldn't nerf liberators because 1% of the players can farm and destroy anything that comes their way.

This is very true, you don't want to balance the game around highly skilled players and alienate the majority of the playerbase. But the argument here is that it doesn't take a particularly high degree of skill to take advantage of this mechanic, and the reward for doing so is disproportionately higher than the associated effort. It doesn't take an ace to know how to attack something from the rear - it's called flanking, and it's a fundamental tactic in these kinds of games. ALL players are more or less familiar with the concept. Give them the fastest platform in the game that's unencumbered by physical obstacles because it can fly over them, and you get a mechanic that is clearly more rewarding and easier to achieve than any other style of play.

It is ONLY the single most powerful tool in the game as long as the player has the skill to use it. Its lethality depends more on the pilots ability than any other vehicle in the game does.

Not true. Put that same player in a tank or on the ground and he will simply be unable to do things that an ESF can do. He wouldn't be able to match the ubiquity and effectiveness of an ESF no matt how hard he tried, because the platform that he's using simply does not have the capability. There is no enemy that an ESF cannot effectively combat. In stark contrast, both tanks and infantry have clear disadvantages against certain threats.

[snafus]

You see 2 tanks fighting on the ground. You pass it by then come back knowing that the tanks on the ground will be facing each other and you know the direction they will be facing.
You can come in from any angle using any terrain including coming in from a very high angle of attack if theres any particular danger (and the occupants of the tank cant even see you because they have the most limited visibility in the game)

Is it really situational awareness that is the issue or is it that the fastest, most manoeverable vehicles in the game which also have the luxury of being able to use the z-axis also get given a 'free kill' card given the opportunity to hit a ground armoured unit in the rear?

There is a reason aircraft don't take additional damage from the rear - and it is because it is too easy for other aircraft to hit them from the rear.

So is it even harder to hit a vehicle that is stuck to the terrain from the rear? Not on the planet I live on.

The ESF crews get given all of the trump cards. And then they also get given the lowest TTK for any vehicle. Honestly - they kill tanks quicker than liberators which is so, so wrong.

Have you ever shot a tank in the ass with a tank buster? It is actually a faster kill then the rocket pods even when people abused the 4 rocket bug.

[Kirotan]

Not true. Put that same player in a tank or on the ground and he will simply be unable to do things that an ESF can do. He wouldn't be able to match the ubiquity and effectiveness of an ESF no matt how hard he tried, because the platform that he's using simply does not have the capability. There is no enemy that an ESF cannot effectively combat. In stark contrast, both tanks and infantry have clear disadvantages against certain threats.

That's not what I mean. What I'm trying to say is the ESF is the deadliest vehicle in the game as long as it is in the right hands.

Now, a highly skilled player will excel with both, but will fare even better with the ESF. However, the average skilled player tends to do better with the MBT compared to piloting the ESF.

[Varsam]

That's not what I mean. What I'm trying to say is the ESF is the deadliest vehicle in the game as long as it is in the right hands.

Now, a highly skilled player will excel with both, but will fare even better with the ESF. However, the average skilled player tends to do better with the MBT compared to piloting the ESF.

The average player also doesn't own rocket pods, whereas the HEAT cannon comes stock on MBTs. That's not the kind of play we're talking about.