Re: Vehicle Balance/Improvement proposal for update #4 (Final)
@rainkloud I'd like to add a bit to this! It seems like a good start to some aircraft and AA issues, but I'd like to provide some suggestions which are more fundamental towards the MBT, since this seems to be very jet and air issue heavy, with very mild touches on other vehicles and their interactions. Hopefully bringing both sides issues to light can make for a more constructive environment. Currently after talking with several people and trying to compile the issues most tankers currently face but it has been hard to get everything in one place and hopefully that will either change, or someone else can also add to the proposals and idea pool.
I am going to leave a link to the 2 week old forum post I made where several of us discussed issues on the current state of the MBT.
https://answers.ea.com/t5/General-Discussion/Lack-of-Tank-Defensive-Capabilities/m-p/11087125#M63309
Thank you as well for that spread sheet! It was very interesting to see some numbers again.
I am however, going to take on some of your points and present counterpoints (again from an MBT perspective in their current state).
First I'd like to start off with the section mentioning the bug of jet lock-on's not targeting ground vehicles.
"
Unable to lock onto empty vehicles - players can exploit this to break locks by exiting/reentering vehicle. Players need to be able to lock on to empty vehicles with lock on weapons and SOFLAM to remedy this."
Lack of Options
This is an issue, which needs to be fixed in several ways. This should not be the most "reliable" (and extremely silly) way to break a weapons lock, while I support the fixing of this interaction, a need for a reliable weapons lock break is needed for ground vehicles, currently with the Thermal smoke being locked in the last tier of an MBT kill pool requirement lock-on's are rampant, and free damage. Having 0 reliable counter to any situation is not good for balance, nor is it fun to be on the receiving end while you are trying to play your intended role. As mentioned in the post I linked, a reliable counter measure is needed especially with all the anti vehicle threats posed to ground vehicles. Which again come from both air and ground. Simply put, as cheesey as hoping out of a tank feels to avoid being locked, what other option do drivers have when some munitions can and do clip through cover and terrain? In the case of air assets, you are auto marked on the ground for ATGM's and most maps do not have enough overhead cover to reliably attempt to escape a jets lock-on if the thermal smoke decides to work. As I mentioned to another use, we get a "incoming missile" alarm but have nothing to do with this information and no way to mitigate that incoming damage. So a proposal on this end would be one of two things, with EWAR being a big theme in 2042, a jammer of some sort to disrupt incoming missile locks could be an option. This would help take the strain off of the thermal smoke which seems to be more intended for ground threats (which it hardly helps to begin with) and the lock breaking capabilities should be standard with the amount of locking threats present.
That was simply a air to ground interaction suggestion, if these two issues aren't handled at the same time that huge hole and overlook in a defensive capability that is currently in use today, would just lead to even further exploitation in the fact there is no way to mitigate the threat from the air. This is not a call to nerf any damage, this is simply asking for an option to act on the "incoming missile" warning I get besides sitting and waiting for the incoming damage.
In more of a balance outlook, currently mobility and turret traverse speeds are a glaring point most seem to take issue with.
Both on the wildcats and the MBT's an issue arises where the AA variant of the wildcat that suffers the most from this issue, being unable to track fast moving aircraft with what feels like a hand cranked turret leaves this vehicle feeling like an uphill struggle to be able to preform a task it was intended task and be a ground threat to aircraft. On the subject of missiles being dodged by aircraft, I am under the firm belief that if an aircraft dedicates it's effort to dodging a missile it should be able to do so, I've mentioned before, a lock should not be an automatic death sentence, or have a 100% chance to make contact. This would in turn be the same issue ground vehicles are facing now with the only difference being that aircraft have flares. Attack helicopters should have a harder time being able to dodge a missile, as they are not as fast, but again a lock should not always be a guaranteed hit if the helicopter or jet is actively trying to evade. There needs to be a fine line between deterrence and annoyance.
Mobility
One of the larger issues with MBT's is their mobility, and before anyone tries to jump up and scream "BUT THEY ARE TANKS" Relax for a moment and read a little further!
Tanks are supposed to be slower compared to other ground vehicles, they are huge, and heavy. But while we have the huge and heavy part covered, basic movements are taken to the extreme, the big one being the 0 turn, or the turning while stationary. Often some of the object on maps are misleading and you think you can run them over and break them, only to be stopped dead in your tracks, and trying to correct your position while not moving makes it feel like you are getting out to push your 70 ton vehicle to point the direction you want it to go. I've seen, and had situations where I've lost fights I should not have lost simply because my ability to turn coupled with the issue of a slow turret are so highly detrimental, especially when facing much more mobile enemies. If a tanks trade off is supposed to be it's ability to be both offensive and defensive, in exchange for its ability to do basic maneuvers then it needs the tools to do so. Currently if a threat is behind me, the cannon elevates slightly when the turret is turned completely around to the rear, so to address this I need to reorient my vehicle, which means most likely 0 turning which takes an eternity to do for no real reason. Current MBT's can easily 0 turn as they take their terrain and weight into account when they are designed.
I agree tanks should stay slow, but they should not be so bad at turning and handling, and with this trade off it will take me to the point of the thread I made, the ability to keep that trade off of bad speed, questionable accuracy and long reload times. The defense, and lack of.
Lack of Defense = Balance issues
This. This right here is a HUGE bane in vehicle balance right now. Currently with the amount of directions which a tank can't retaliate and the amount of active AT threats that are in game, tanks are just that, big, hulking targets with no way to mitigate damage. I'm not going to go through this again as I've already made a thread on it but long story short the "keep moving" mentality is good until you need to make a stable calculated shot from a long distance which most times you only get one chance to do especially if it's an infantrymen who is very mobile.
To put it mildly, EWAR in the form of being able to jam air assets from having risk free 100% up time locks, on a cooldown obviously, an APS (active protection system) -Which again are in use in todays modern world- to mitigate the rocket spam from ground based targets -does not target tank shells because it punishes better positioned tankers vs their opponents and ruins their ambush and advantage- this is aimed at the constant rocket spam used by respawning infantry that is being abused with no counter or downside. (same thing with C5, I killed the same person 6 times trying to C5 my tank with the wingsuit and would suicide if they failed and come right back) <- More on this later. And last but not least, ERA (Explosive reactive armor) All of these should be standard on the tanks to not give one tanker an uneeded advantage over a newer player, while also encouraging tanks to try and play other places besides at the edges of maps sue to slow turret turning, lack of defense and low splash damage from cannon rounds/low MG damage. This is a common complaint I see from infantry players "tanks just stay out and farm us" well, with their ability to pop in and out of cover, lack of ability to respond in medium range type quarter situations, and the constant blind spots, yes a tank should not be sitting in close quarters, which most capture points sit at and i feel are very small and punishing to ground vehicles. Give a tank the ERA to be able to take a risk and get up in some of these capture points and maybe it'll encourage different behavior.
Main Cannon
The options for the cannon rounds are lackluster at best. The splash on the default cannon round is very low, even for being the "well rounded" option with more emphasis on anti vehicle rolls. Direct hitting small targets with 1 shot and a long reload while being a large target does not feel good, no one should be comfortable trying to charge me head on because I have to hit them directly with a shell meant to rip through a vehicle holding a frizzbee of C5, the crater it creates in the ground is actually smaller than the actual damage surface it produces. I would even venture to say the transport heli's needing 4 tank shots to bring down is very steep given the reload times. I cant comment much on numbers, but I would be happy if reload speeds were looked at and considered.
I may add on to this later but I've spend enough time on this for the day, I look forward to having some discussions! Also it seems the forums keep eating my posts.
I am going to leave a link to the 2 week old forum post I made where several of us discussed issues on the current state of the MBT.
https://answers.ea.com/t5/General-Discussion/Lack-of-Tank-Defensive-Capabilities/m-p/11087125#M63309
Thank you as well for that spread sheet! It was very interesting to see some numbers again.
I am however, going to take on some of your points and present counterpoints (again from an MBT perspective in their current state).
First I'd like to start off with the section mentioning the bug of jet lock-on's not targeting ground vehicles.
"
Unable to lock onto empty vehicles - players can exploit this to break locks by exiting/reentering vehicle. Players need to be able to lock on to empty vehicles with lock on weapons and SOFLAM to remedy this."
Lack of Options
This is an issue, which needs to be fixed in several ways. This should not be the most "reliable" (and extremely silly) way to break a weapons lock, while I support the fixing of this interaction, a need for a reliable weapons lock break is needed for ground vehicles, currently with the Thermal smoke being locked in the last tier of an MBT kill pool requirement lock-on's are rampant, and free damage. Having 0 reliable counter to any situation is not good for balance, nor is it fun to be on the receiving end while you are trying to play your intended role. As mentioned in the post I linked, a reliable counter measure is needed especially with all the anti vehicle threats posed to ground vehicles. Which again come from both air and ground. Simply put, as cheesey as hoping out of a tank feels to avoid being locked, what other option do drivers have when some munitions can and do clip through cover and terrain? In the case of air assets, you are auto marked on the ground for ATGM's and most maps do not have enough overhead cover to reliably attempt to escape a jets lock-on if the thermal smoke decides to work. As I mentioned to another use, we get a "incoming missile" alarm but have nothing to do with this information and no way to mitigate that incoming damage. So a proposal on this end would be one of two things, with EWAR being a big theme in 2042, a jammer of some sort to disrupt incoming missile locks could be an option. This would help take the strain off of the thermal smoke which seems to be more intended for ground threats (which it hardly helps to begin with) and the lock breaking capabilities should be standard with the amount of locking threats present.
That was simply a air to ground interaction suggestion, if these two issues aren't handled at the same time that huge hole and overlook in a defensive capability that is currently in use today, would just lead to even further exploitation in the fact there is no way to mitigate the threat from the air. This is not a call to nerf any damage, this is simply asking for an option to act on the "incoming missile" warning I get besides sitting and waiting for the incoming damage.
In more of a balance outlook, currently mobility and turret traverse speeds are a glaring point most seem to take issue with.
Both on the wildcats and the MBT's an issue arises where the AA variant of the wildcat that suffers the most from this issue, being unable to track fast moving aircraft with what feels like a hand cranked turret leaves this vehicle feeling like an uphill struggle to be able to preform a task it was intended task and be a ground threat to aircraft. On the subject of missiles being dodged by aircraft, I am under the firm belief that if an aircraft dedicates it's effort to dodging a missile it should be able to do so, I've mentioned before, a lock should not be an automatic death sentence, or have a 100% chance to make contact. This would in turn be the same issue ground vehicles are facing now with the only difference being that aircraft have flares. Attack helicopters should have a harder time being able to dodge a missile, as they are not as fast, but again a lock should not always be a guaranteed hit if the helicopter or jet is actively trying to evade. There needs to be a fine line between deterrence and annoyance.
Mobility
One of the larger issues with MBT's is their mobility, and before anyone tries to jump up and scream "BUT THEY ARE TANKS" Relax for a moment and read a little further!
Tanks are supposed to be slower compared to other ground vehicles, they are huge, and heavy. But while we have the huge and heavy part covered, basic movements are taken to the extreme, the big one being the 0 turn, or the turning while stationary. Often some of the object on maps are misleading and you think you can run them over and break them, only to be stopped dead in your tracks, and trying to correct your position while not moving makes it feel like you are getting out to push your 70 ton vehicle to point the direction you want it to go. I've seen, and had situations where I've lost fights I should not have lost simply because my ability to turn coupled with the issue of a slow turret are so highly detrimental, especially when facing much more mobile enemies. If a tanks trade off is supposed to be it's ability to be both offensive and defensive, in exchange for its ability to do basic maneuvers then it needs the tools to do so. Currently if a threat is behind me, the cannon elevates slightly when the turret is turned completely around to the rear, so to address this I need to reorient my vehicle, which means most likely 0 turning which takes an eternity to do for no real reason. Current MBT's can easily 0 turn as they take their terrain and weight into account when they are designed.
I agree tanks should stay slow, but they should not be so bad at turning and handling, and with this trade off it will take me to the point of the thread I made, the ability to keep that trade off of bad speed, questionable accuracy and long reload times. The defense, and lack of.
Lack of Defense = Balance issues
This. This right here is a HUGE bane in vehicle balance right now. Currently with the amount of directions which a tank can't retaliate and the amount of active AT threats that are in game, tanks are just that, big, hulking targets with no way to mitigate damage. I'm not going to go through this again as I've already made a thread on it but long story short the "keep moving" mentality is good until you need to make a stable calculated shot from a long distance which most times you only get one chance to do especially if it's an infantrymen who is very mobile.
To put it mildly, EWAR in the form of being able to jam air assets from having risk free 100% up time locks, on a cooldown obviously, an APS (active protection system) -Which again are in use in todays modern world- to mitigate the rocket spam from ground based targets -does not target tank shells because it punishes better positioned tankers vs their opponents and ruins their ambush and advantage- this is aimed at the constant rocket spam used by respawning infantry that is being abused with no counter or downside. (same thing with C5, I killed the same person 6 times trying to C5 my tank with the wingsuit and would suicide if they failed and come right back) <- More on this later. And last but not least, ERA (Explosive reactive armor) All of these should be standard on the tanks to not give one tanker an uneeded advantage over a newer player, while also encouraging tanks to try and play other places besides at the edges of maps sue to slow turret turning, lack of defense and low splash damage from cannon rounds/low MG damage. This is a common complaint I see from infantry players "tanks just stay out and farm us" well, with their ability to pop in and out of cover, lack of ability to respond in medium range type quarter situations, and the constant blind spots, yes a tank should not be sitting in close quarters, which most capture points sit at and i feel are very small and punishing to ground vehicles. Give a tank the ERA to be able to take a risk and get up in some of these capture points and maybe it'll encourage different behavior.
Main Cannon
The options for the cannon rounds are lackluster at best. The splash on the default cannon round is very low, even for being the "well rounded" option with more emphasis on anti vehicle rolls. Direct hitting small targets with 1 shot and a long reload while being a large target does not feel good, no one should be comfortable trying to charge me head on because I have to hit them directly with a shell meant to rip through a vehicle holding a frizzbee of C5, the crater it creates in the ground is actually smaller than the actual damage surface it produces. I would even venture to say the transport heli's needing 4 tank shots to bring down is very steep given the reload times. I cant comment much on numbers, but I would be happy if reload speeds were looked at and considered.
I may add on to this later but I've spend enough time on this for the day, I look forward to having some discussions! Also it seems the forums keep eating my posts.
