Some Thoughts on MBT's from a Veteran Tanker

[Gugabalog]

Originally Posted by opticalshadow

its also worth noting that hugby stated that balence was no where near right from what we saw in videos so far (such as the one gameplay vid where max units were about as tough as teh rexos around it)

i imagine that thoughout beta we will see a varied amount of tank balences before we even out. i cant imagine theyll make them fall to a handfull of AV given the amount of players that will be there at launch.

Did he say that? That answers the question about the Mag.

[opticalshadow]

Originally Posted by Gugabalog

Did he say that? That answers the question about the Mag.

yeah, on top of that we dont even have certs in, which will change even the base values balence to keep on par. not to mention how often things get balenced even after they are released and "balenced"

if something isnt right, it will be changed. SOE has made a big effort this time around keeping in contact with us, theyve kept us in the loop, they are answering alot of our questions leaving very little off the table, i cant imagine given the level of communication given so far, that if something come beta is out of wack, it wont be fixed promptly.

[Gugabalog]

Yea, I agree. Given this level of transparency they will probably be fairly responsive. Though I imagine that it's like a internet writer reading his comments levels of irritating listening to a load of whining.

[Ark]

Originally Posted by Blackwolf

Turrets are possibly the weakest part of real world MBTs

Actually, the front of the turret usually has the thickest armor.

[Sharkface]

MR. Vanu wants his tank to be OP, what a surprise... If this happens i want nuclear capability on my vangaurd.

[RageMasterUK]

Honestly dont see the problem here. The Magriders main gun does turn like a turret. The whole tank is a rotating turret. Furthermore whatever you're attacking you naturally point your front armor towards, which is 9 times out of 10 gonna be a really good thing for Vanu tank drivers. Shit you fire at tends to want to fire back.

There is an issue with control also. If you have a driver operated rotating turret for the main cannon controlled by the mouse, how do you "twist" the chassis of your vehicle? Not with A and D thats fo' sure, unless you dont want to strafe. They would have to add in extra key bindings specifically for the VS to allow strafe, turn and turret twist.

VS should get a cert option to mount the main gun on a turret and sacrifice their strafing ability, so they become more like the other factions tanks. I'd be happy with that.

You cant do everything otherwise it will create imbalance...

-RageMasterUK

[Landtank]

There is no problem. Trust me.

[Gugabalog]

Originally Posted by RageMasterUK

Honestly dont see the problem here. The Magriders main gun does turn like a turret. The whole tank is a rotating turret. Furthermore whatever you're attacking you naturally point your front armor towards, which is 9 times out of 10 gonna be a really good thing for Vanu tank drivers. Shit you fire at tends to want to fire back.

There is an issue with control also. If you have a driver operated rotating turret for the main cannon controlled by the mouse, how do you "twist" the chassis of your vehicle? Not with A and D thats fo' sure, unless you dont want to strafe. They would have to add in extra key bindings specifically for the VS to allow strafe, turn and turret twist.

VS should get a cert option to mount the main gun on a turret and sacrifice their strafing ability, so they become more like the other factions tanks. I'd be happy with that.

You cant do everything otherwise it will create imbalance...

-RageMasterUK

If you read closely you would see that the rotating turret would only be given to dedicated gunners, not driver-gunners.

[Blackwolf]

Originally Posted by Gugabalog

If you read closely you would see that the rotating turret would only be given to dedicated gunners, not driver-gunners.

So VS would have the only tanks that had dedicated gunners and therefore the only tanks that had higher levels of maneuverability and mobile warfare capability.

The more I read the more I realize you really do want a super tank.

[Gugabalog]

Originally Posted by Blackwolf

So VS would have the only tanks that had dedicated gunners and therefore the only tanks that had higher levels of maneuverability and mobile warfare capability.

The more I read the more I realize you really do want a super tank.

The more you read the more you twist the words you see. Noone stated that only the VS would get a dedicated gunner cert. It would be universal.

EDIT: Cut down the confirmation bias.

[Blackwolf]

Originally Posted by Gugabalog

The more you read the more you twist the words you see. Noone stated that only the VS would get a dedicated gunner cert. It would be universal.

EDIT: Cut down the confirmation bias.

So now you're re-routing the discussion towards everyone getting dedicated gunners, which goes against everything the game has been geared towards when it comes to ground warfare.

Exactly how much of the game do you want to change to fix this one non-existent problem?

This isn't even your thread, this started off as someone saying "hey another game created hover tanks with driver controlled turrets and this is how they did it!".

[Gugabalog]

Originally Posted by Blackwolf

So now you're re-routing the discussion towards everyone getting dedicated gunners, which goes against everything the game has been geared towards when it comes to ground warfare.

Exactly how much of the game do you want to change to fix this one non-existent problem?

This isn't even your thread, this started off as someone saying "hey another game created hover tanks with driver controlled turrets and this is how they did it!".

It was an endorsement of making it possible for magriders to have turrets and still remain balanced. If there is a perceived problem within entertainment it makes the entertainment less entertaining and reduces the value of it. It is a potential balance issue where people have made several suggestions as to how to balance it. Go back and reread the OP before you start claiming to understand the subject of the thread.

[Blackwolf]

Originally Posted by Gugabalog

It was an endorsement of making it possible for magriders to have turrets and still remain balanced. If there is a perceived problem within entertainment it makes the entertainment less entertaining and reduces the value of it. It is a potential balance issue where people have made several suggestions as to how to balance it. Go back and reread the OP before you start claiming to understand the subject of the thread.

It was a statement that it was possible to have a hover tank with a driver controlled turret, which is exactly what his video linked to. He never mentioned dedicated gunner. Not once. He stayed within the boundaries of what the DEVs were driving for with his suggestion. He was not proposing that the entire ground war be changed for the benefit of one vehicle, you are.

Perceived and Potential were highlighted because these are words based on opinions, not facts. Balance was highlighted because it's a word used by people who don't have all the facts. People was highlighted because people aren't experienced game developers who have daily hands on experience with what people are talking about.

The devs are looking at the battlefield from directly above and you are looking at it from personal perspective, that is the difference between your perceptions. They see the big picture and you see personal desire.

Wait for beta. Or present hard data to support your perceptions and suggestions for balance. Right now there is no medium to work with, without a medium everyone here will have different ideas and perceptions of the discussion, which leads to arguments that last for 12 pages.

What I've seen in this thread is an OP who was asking for a turret on the Magrider and demonstrating exactly how it could be done without a dedicated gunner using video. He shared his opinion and supplied hard data to back it up. What I've also seen is a video of a Magrider in PS2 strafing (ADADing really) in a 5 second smoke infested clip and people pointing at that and saying it's strafe speed is really slow.

What I haven't seen, is evidence that the front armor needs to be increased. I've read all kinds of hypothesis, but nothing to back it up. What I haven't seen is a comparison between the Magriders strafe speed, and it's forward movement speed. Nor have I seen evidence that the Magrider is somehow weaker then the other two MBTs in any way shape or form.

The people's perceived balance issues don't exist. And this entire discussion has blown way out of proportion. It wasn't a balance issue that the OP was discussing. It was a change in the mechanics that support the Magrider and presenting a possible method of control for that Magrider which wouldn't impact the balance between the Magrider and other MBTs.

In fact nothing in the OP was suggested that would have a direct impact on interactions between Magriders and other objects in the game. It was a simple suggestion that would only impact the interaction between player and Magrider.

[Gugabalog]

It was a statement that it was possible to have a hover tank with a driver controlled turret, which is exactly what his video linked to. He never mentioned dedicated gunner. Not once. He stayed within the boundaries of what the DEVs were driving for with his suggestion. He was not proposing that the entire ground war be changed for the benefit of one vehicle, you are.

Oops must of gotten this thread mixed up with another one or his post with another of the 100+ posts in this one.

EDIT: I thought he said there was a dedicated gunner in the ETQW video? (Maybe I'm getting a little confirmation biased)

In fact nothing in the OP was suggested that would have a direct impact on interactions between Magriders and other objects in the game. It was a simple suggestion that would only impact the interaction between player and Magrider.

That change in interaction affects the game world.

The people's perceived balance issues don't exist. And this entire discussion has blown way out of proportion. It wasn't a balance issue that the OP was discussing. It was a change in the mechanics that support the Magrider and presenting a possible method of control for that Magrider which wouldn't impact the balance between the Magrider and other MBTs.

I was not equating perceived balance issue with perceived problem. And you didn't address my point about how many will be turned off from it due to even perceived problems which can be addressed without upsetting game balance.

Wait for beta. Or present hard data to support your perceptions and suggestions for balance. Right now there is no medium to work with, without a medium everyone here will have different ideas and perceptions of the discussion, which leads to arguments that last for 12 pages.

All data would be based on media streams on the alpha builds which have balance issues by default. Building balance is apart of beta and there is value in discussing it before going into beta. It can give people multiple perspectives to judge certain aspects from. In addition is there anything wrong with building consensus?

The devs are looking at the battlefield from directly above and you are looking at it from personal perspective, that is the difference between your perceptions. They see the big picture and you see personal desire.

Look at my other threads. Yes I would love for the mag to work a certain way but the ENTIRE argument was about how to have it work that certain way WHILE remaining balanced.

What I haven't seen, is evidence that the front armor needs to be increased. I've read all kinds of hypothesis, but nothing to back it up. What I haven't seen is a comparison between the Magriders strafe speed, and it's forward movement speed. Nor have I seen evidence that the Magrider is somehow weaker then the other two MBTs in any way shape or form.

I am saying that regarding it's design philosophy which places a heavy emphasis on armor facing would seem that the natural progression would be to either A) more heavily emphasize the frontal armor than it already is (either by default or by certs/sidegrades) or B) the flank armor to deal with it's forced vunerability.

It was a statement that it was possible to have a hover tank with a driver controlled turret, which is exactly what his video linked to. He never mentioned dedicated gunner. Not once. He stayed within the boundaries of what the DEVs were driving for with his suggestion. He was not proposing that the entire ground war be changed for the benefit of one vehicle, you are.

I am advocating the remake of the mag to fit in to the EXISTING ground war while still featuring the proposed ideas.

[ExquisitExamplE]

Just a reminder to everyone, I've updated the OP and added a video demonstrating ETQW's Desecrator tank, cheers!

Originally Posted by RageMasterUK

There is an issue with control also. If you have a driver operated rotating turret for the main cannon controlled by the mouse, how do you "twist" the chassis of your vehicle? Not with A and D thats fo' sure, unless you dont want to strafe. They would have to add in extra key bindings specifically for the VS to allow strafe, turn and turret twist.

I actually covered this in the OP, it's not only possible to control such a tank using the keyboard, but also quite fluid and seamless once you've mastered it.

Turret control = Mouse
Forward/Reverse = W/S
Rotate Tank Body Counterclockwise/Clockwise = A/D
Strafe Tank Body Left/Right = Q/E