Some Thoughts on MBT's from a Veteran Tanker

[ExquisitExamplE]

UPDATE: I threw together a brief video showing the movement and combat capabilities of ETQW's Strogg Desecrator Tank, A tank that I believe shows what the magrider could and should be capable of. I've been thinking about it quite a bit, and it comes down to the fact that I really don't want to have to steer the vehicle by using the mouse. Hopefully they've implemented some other type of system in Planetside 2.


The main suggestions I've gleaned from reading your comments:

- ADD ROTATING TURRET TO MAGRIDER
- INCREASE TURRET HEIGHT TO NOMINAL COMBAT LEVEL.
- ENSURE MAGRIDER HAS ADEQUATE ACCELERATION/ROTATION SPEED

Now of course we'll have to wait a bit longer to see how everything shakes out, how the different MBT's handle and how they stack up. I'll reserve judgment of course, but I think the potential issues people have been bringing up are valid ones and hopefully someone from SOE will see this thread and get some ideas.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
In this frenzy of anticipation surrounding the days prior to beta, I finally decided to stop lurking the forums, make an account, and attempt to bring something pertinent and worthwhile to the forums.

A bit of background on myself, I've been PC gaming for 10+ years, my first forays into competitive FPS were with Counterstrike 1.5 (Before they introduced riot shields and the FAMAS/Galil), followed by Quake 3. My first memories of "tanking" were with Westwood studios's superlative first-person shooter, C&C: Renegade. The game had really great vehicle mechanics, complete with artillery, aircraft and faction-specific tanks, it had elements of tower-defense games at a time when they were still in their infancy.


I later moved on to Planetside, and then later to Battlefield 2, a game which really fomented my love for vehicle combat. For the last few years I've been really enjoying Id's Enemy Territory: Quake Wars, another extremely well-made objective-based multiplayer fps.

ETQW is interesting in that it has a tank that is very similar to the Magrider, namely the "Desecrator". The main difference is the "dessie" as we like to call it, is about 100 times the combat vehicle the magrider is, thanks in large part to it's fully rotatable turret and different system of movement.

With the desecrator, the mouse controls the turret, W and S move forward and backward, A and D rotate the body of the dessie counter clockwise or clockwise, and Q and E cause the vehicle to strafe. Also, the crouch button would cause you to enter a lockdown mode which operates in the same way as the TR Max, sacrificing all mobility for increased rate-of-fire. The cannon is a direct-fire (travels in a straight line) plasma cannon with a relatively slow travel speed and limited (but still long) range.

The nemesis of the Strogg Desecrator is the GDF Titan Tank, A much more standard tank and somewhat similar to the Vanguard in it's build. It has decent forward speed, but poor maneuverability which it compensates for with heavier armor and a stronger, shell-based cannon which has a trajectory drop, but unlimited range and a fast shell travel speed.

Although these two vehicles are asymmetrical and quite dissimilar, they are well-balanced in terms of power, in the same way that I imagine SOE intends to balance the PS2 MBT's, with the VS gleaning their advantage from superior agility and precision.

Kill times for ETQW Vehicles:

Titan: Takes 4 direct plasma cannon to destroy.
Desecrator: Takes 2 direct tank shells to destroy.

Although the Desecrator dies much more quickly than the Titan, it's ability to strafe combined with it's slimmer profile give it more than a fighting chance in the hands of a skilled driver.

Some brief clips of me playing:


Which brings me (Finally!) to my main point, which is I have this feeling that in order for the Magrider to be able to fill its role and act effectively as a single-man MBT (Something which all MBT's in PS2 are supposed to be capable of), it absolutely needs a fully rotatable turret. As I understand it now, Both NC and TR have tanks that have at least 2 fully 360 degree rotatable turrets, one for the the driver and one for the gunner, while the Magrider still has it's old setup of one fixed gun for the driver, and a rotatable turret for the gunner.

As the pilot of a single-man MBT, I want to be able to keep a high-rate of speed while at the same time being able to keep my sights locked on an enemy vehicle at all times. This means I could potentially be retreating from an area, going full speed and being pursued by enemy tanks, but still have my turret aimed at them and engaging. I would, of course, be at a disadvantage because my weaker rear armor would be facing the pursuing tanks, but at least I would be able to track and/or engage them.

I know this issue has been brought up before, but I thought I'd share my perspective. Any other tank drivers feel similarly?

In short, I'd be more than willing to sacrifice a bit of armor to gain a functionality that tanks have had since 1917. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renault_FT-17

[Tuoweit]

It already has that feature. You just need to bring a gunner with you (the gunner being another feature all tanks have had since 1917...). Or, apparently, swap seat positions to the gunner seat (but then you can't drive of course).

[QuantumMechanic]

I believe the fixed-forward main gun of the Magrider is something of a tradeoff that you get for things the other MBT's don't have: the ability to strafe and traverse over water.

[Liwen Diamond]

You make a good argument, but I don't think I'd be willing to sacrifice armor for rotation of a turret. the Mag is already the weakest of the three MBT. Wouldn't want to make it too paper thin would we?

I'm not actually going to pronounce myself on a clear yes or no until I've tested it out for myself. The unique mobility for the Mag might compensate enough for it's flaws Imagine for a moment that it can move backward as fast as it can move forward and your fighting retreat manoeuvers could become viable.

[Ivam Akorahil]

iam a tank driver and gunner (by now out of duty) if i was retreating from the enemy, never with my back to them, allways front armor to the enemy - reversing trying to get into the next best cover/concealment, and then striking while they expected me to flee.

but yes in general i still do agree, a MBT needs a rotating turret. not beeing able to do so makes it almost impossible to fire while maneuvering and fire and maneuver is the key element of armored combat.

[Daemonn]

Originally Posted by Tuoweit

It already has that feature. You just need to bring a gunner with you (the gunner being another feature all tanks have had since 1917...). Or, apparently, swap seat positions to the gunner seat (but then you can't drive of course).

Lol... cant tell if serious...

[ExquisitExamplE]

Originally Posted by Liwen Diamond

You make a good argument, but I don't think I'd be willing to sacrifice armor for rotation of a turret. the Mag is already the weakest of the three MBT. Wouldn't want to make it too paper thin would we?

I'm not actually going to pronounce myself on a clear yes or no until I've tested it out for myself. The unique mobility for the Mag might compensate enough for it's flaws Imagine for a moment that it can move backward as fast as it can move forward and your fighting retreat manoeuvers could become viable.

You make some good points, If the mag has the weakest armor already, I'd rather they just keep that as is and add the turret.

Or course I'll also reserve judgment until I test it for myself, I just hope for the VS' sake they tightened up the controls a lot on the Mag, I always got the feeling I was driving through sludge with that thing. Particularly, I'd really like to see more responsive acceleration and braking.

Originally Posted by Ivam Akorahil

iam a tank driver and gunner (by now out of duty) if i was retreating from the enemy, never with my back to them, allways front armor to the enemy - reversing trying to get into the next best cover/concealment, and then striking while they expected me to flee.

but yes in general i still do agree, a MBT needs a rotating turret. not beeing able to do so makes it almost impossible to fire while maneuvering and fire and maneuver is the key element of armored combat.

Of course ideally you never want to expose your rear, especially with the recent repeal of don't ask, don't tell (Sorry, I had to o.O). There are of course situations when such a retreat will be inevitable, and in those cases, having your proverbial head on a swivel can prove invaluable. I think we are pretty much on the same page here.

[Inq]

Originally Posted by Liwen Diamond

You make a good argument, but I don't think I'd be willing to sacrifice armor for rotation of a turret. the Mag is already the weakest of the three MBT. Wouldn't want to make it too paper thin would we?

I'm not actually going to pronounce myself on a clear yes or no until I've tested it out for myself. The unique mobility for the Mag might compensate enough for it's flaws Imagine for a moment that it can move backward as fast as it can move forward and your fighting retreat manoeuvers could become viable.

Pretty sure in the videos I have seen they have said the prowler is the weakest tank armor wise.

I think a better compromise would be an overall decrease in damage output from the mag.

With the new sidegrade system there could be many options, Such as: change the main gun to a fairly high damage but short effective range plasma weapon OR pick a beam weapon with long range, no drop off but lower damage.

Not sure if im alone on this but I have never liked the design of the Magrider.

I like the concept of a hover tank but not one without a turret.
A forward mounted, fixed gun is something I would normally associate with a very large powerful weapon system for use at long range or in ambushes. (Like an artillery peice/Mobile AT gun)

I feel Magrider has always been the Vanu's 'elephant in the room' as such the faction is all about technology and advancement but to design a futuristic MBT without a turret for the main gun would be taking a step backwards not forwards.

[Gugabalog]

I agree. I have no clue why it was done this way, even if people rationalize it as the whole tank is the turret.

[QuantumMechanic]

Honestly, people have been voicing this same sentiment since we first got pics of the Magrider. If it hasn't changed yet, I don't think it's going to change (sad as that may seem). But be sure to voice your opinion in the beta forum once we get there.

[Electrofreak]

Originally Posted by Liwen Diamond

You make a good argument, but I don't think I'd be willing to sacrifice armor for rotation of a turret. the Mag is already the weakest of the three MBT. Wouldn't want to make it too paper thin would we?

The Prowler is actually the fastest tank and, as far as I've heard, is the lightest-armored in PS2.

[ExquisitExamplE]

Originally Posted by Inq

Not sure if im alone on this but I have never liked the design of the Magrider.

I like the concept of a hover tank but not one without a turret.
A forward mounted, fixed gun is something I would normally associate with a very large powerful weapon system for use at long range or in ambushes. (Like an artillery peice/Mobile AT gun)

I feel Magrider has always been the Vanu's 'elephant in the room' as such the faction is all about technology and advancement but to design a futuristic MBT without a turret for the main gun would be taking a step backwards not forwards.

Agreed. I'd like to see the Magrider as the most lightly armored of the MBT's, with a very slim profile (small hitbox), limited top speed, but great acceleration and maneuverability (which of course necessitates the fully rotating turret).

A tactic that should/would be very common is Magrider drivers juking tank shells by timing the tanks firing sequence and strafing to the left or right just prior to the shell being fired. It's a tactic I've used to great effect in ETQW.

If, and this is a big if, if they can manage to make the Mag as mobile and responsive as the scythe appears to be, but on land, I could maybe be alright with it having a fixed turret, but it would have to be supremely agile and responsive, much more so than the PS1 Mag.

As far as side grades go, while I imagine the NC tacking bigger guns and armor upgrades onto their tanks, the TR utilizing high rate-of-fire, suppression based technology and speed upgrades, I'd like to see the VS use more mobility based, stealth based technology. Imagine if VS tanks could add a cloaking gen that would enable them to cloak for long periods, but would reduce them to an almost unarmored paper tank. Imagine if VS tanks could burrow into the ground and remain hidden, only to emerge right after an enemy tank column passes over them?

It seems to me that for the VS, technology and subterfuge should go hand-in-hand.

[feuerdog]

Originally Posted by QuantumMechanic

I believe the fixed-forward main gun of the Magrider is something of a tradeoff that you get for things the other MBT's don't have: the ability to strafe and traverse over water.

This.


We still don'r know what the turret turning rates are like, or the turning rates and speeds of the various MBT. Let alone and ballistic and damage differences between the main guns.
Beta should address this.

From what i've seen so far though, the magrider is a tradeoff of weapon/armor for unique maneuverability.

[ArmedZealot]

Magrider got nerfed coming from PS1 to PS2. Big reason why I won't be playing VS in PS2.


Magrider gun isn't an independant turret? Why? It wasn't a problem in PS1.

[Biohazard]

Originally Posted by ArmedZealot

Magrider gun isn't an independant turret? Why? It wasn't a problem in PS1.

In PS1 the secondary gun was fixed and the main gun was turreted, now the main gun is fixed and the secondary gun is turreted.

EDIT* Wait... did I misunderstand your post?