Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Intumesce

Class Discussion: How Do We Make MBTs Balanced?

Recommended Posts

As some of you may be familiar with higher tiers by now, you're probably noticed that there is a huge power gap between MBTs and other classes.
But since discussing this is a hush-hush, no-hurtsy-feelings topic on the official forums, I think it's better we theorize how to make gameplay at tier 6+ more fair for everyone involved over here instead.

I am by no means a master of game balance and I didn't take any objectivity classes in college (I never went to college but that's besides the point) but I think it's best I lay out some basic rules from which we can start the discussion:

  • MBTs are as a whole not game breaking, they deserve to be in the game as much as any other class (bar arty of course) and shouldn't be redesigned from the ground up, rather they should be tweaked and fine tuned
  • MBT armor needs to remain relevant but other classes must have a more than fair chance of damaging them, e.g. LTs and TDs should almost always be able to penetrate them in the side and autocannons should without exception pen them in the rear
  • MBTs should preferably not be hit with huge nerfs (unless the vehicle in question is grossly overpowered) but rather if other vehicles in the same tier suffer against MBTs as a whole, those classes should be buffed rather than MBTs getting hit by a heavy nerf
  • Every class should, under ideal circumstances, be as powerful as the next; a tier 9 AFV should be as strong as a tier 9 MBT, but it's up to the player (within reasonable limits) to be able to capitalize on these respective strengths

Without going into excessive detail, here are some ideas to make non-intrusive nerfs to MBTs plus some respectable buffs for all other classes. Note that not all ideas need to apply at once and not exactly to the same degree as described:

  • MBT hull and turret traverse should be nerfed by a slight margin past tier 6, ranging from a 5-20% nerf (I'm looking at you, T-90) between vehicles. Not enough for everyone to notice they turn like a slug, but just enough to give MBTs decreased reaction time to being flanked.
  • MBT top speeds should be lowered by their category and acceleration. The Leopard 2A6 and Ariete for example have very good acceleration and respectable top speeds, but this makes it way too easy for them to catch up to lighter classes. The T-90 for example should never go past 60km/h and the Challenger 1 should hover at a steady 40-45km/h. You can even slightly (0.5-1s) increase their acceleration in return to make them more mobile but less speedy.
  • MBTs should have lower view range at low tiers, starting at circa 300-320m and peaking at roughly 380m at tier 8 and not going any higher unless it truly needs the view range for whatever reason. They can be specced to have more view range just as an option but it's highly unlikely anyone will.
  • Map size should preferably go up by roughly 50% in size and have less clutter and inaccessible areas so that mobility, camouflage, and view range matter more.
  • Most, if not all other tier 7+ tanks need to be buffed to make them more effective at combating MBTs when the situation favors them. An MBT should always have the upper hand frontally, but will quickly lose its edge over range, out in the open, and when its sides are exposed. After all, if MBTs can't be nerfed, buff everything else!

Those are just some ideas to get us going. If anyone wants I can go dig through my official forum posts and dig out nuggets which are worthy of reposting here, since rewriting a great idea I might not remember so well takes time and probably doesn't capture the idea as well as I did in those posts when I first wrote them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought the balancing was pretty good as it is now... Most people play MBTs, but they still rely on scouts and get outplayed by scouts, arty and lights if the players are competent enough. I agree on the mobility nerfs that I was told are going to hit MBTs next patch, but I don't think the other stuff you propose is necessary, to be honest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think MBT's armor needs to be nerfed a bit. Having 2 MBTs (ex: chally) face2face is just some dumb shit, and all the camo and viewrange counts for nothing when you can't reliably pen its side angled with TD/LT guns or missiles to a small part of the front. And that's not even accounting APS that shoots your missile down, or overabundance of ERAs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Xen said:

I thought the balancing was pretty good as it is now... Most people play MBTs, but they still rely on scouts and get outplayed by scouts, arty and lights if the players are competent enough. I agree on the mobility nerfs that I was told are going to hit MBTs next patch, but I don't think the other stuff you propose is necessary, to be honest.

Honest question: have you not played past tier 6 yet? It's very, very hard to miss how strong MBTs get at tier 7+ unless you yourself are driving an MBT and you only play when drunk. At tier 2-4 the meta is pretty AFV and TD dominant and MBTs might actually be a bit underpowered there (I haven't played them much and try to skip when possible so I can't comment on it too much) but at tier 5 and 6 everything is relatively well balanced among all classes.
At tier 7 things get odd, at tier 8 you definitely notice MBTs are stronger than what else is on display, and at tier 9 you used your tier 8 AFV tokens to get a T-90MS and a Challenger 2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Intumesce said:

Honest question: have you not played past tier 6 yet? It's very, very hard to miss how strong MBTs get at tier 7+ unless you yourself are driving an MBT and aren't paying much attention. At tier 2-4 the meta is pretty AFV and TD dominant and MBTs might actually be a bit underpowered there (I haven't played them much and try to skip when possible so I can't comment on it too much) but at tier 5 and 6 everything is relatively well balanced among all classes.
At tier 7 things get odd, at tier 8 you definitely notice MBTs are stronger than what else is on display, and at tier 9 you used your tier 8 AFV tokens to get a T-90MS and a Challenger 2.

I've played my M1 Abrams mostly.

There are plenty of routes MBTs cannot take because they'll get shat on by arty, meaning they can get flanked in mid/late game rather easily, and they get outspotted by TDs, AFVs and LTs, so they rely on the ones on their own team and can get outplayed by the ones on the enemy team.

Unlike Nekommando, I also very much like the MBT vs MBT battles. If you can pull it off and work as a team to overwhelm them, they're over in a minute. If there's just no opportunity to do so or you don't have the mates for it, you try to hit weak spots and/or spam HE at the enemy MBTs. These fights are very lengthy, but they make RNG much less relevant than in WoT encounters, and you actually have to choose where to shoot and what do to depending on the exact situation, whereas being able to pen weakspots with AP for full damage frontally would result in boring shit like in WoT where there's always only one best spot to aim for. Lengthy battles between MBTs also mean more time for LTs and AFVs to do their thing and outplay MBTs.

Do you try and pen the weak spot with AP for full damage? Do you just spam HE at the weak spot for 200 damage? Do you try to disable important modules with HE (gun, for instance)? Do you aim for the engine deck/rear half of the sides with HE to set him on fire?

If you could just pen weakspots with AP very reliably like in WoT or like T7 MBTs can pen T-80's turret, you wouldn't have any of these choices to take. It's just all about clicking the exact same weak spot in every single encounter regardless of the exact circumstances.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Xen said:

I've played my M1 Abrams mostly.

There are plenty of routes MBTs cannot take because they'll get shat on by arty, meaning they can get flanked in mid/late game rather easily, and they get outspotted by TDs, AFVs and LTs, so they rely on the ones on their own team and can get outplayed by the ones on the enemy team.

Unlike Nekommando, I also very much like the MBT vs MBT battles. If you can pull it off and work as a team to overwhelm them, they're over in a minute. If there's just no opportunity to do so or you don't have the mates for it, you try to hit weak spots and/or spam HE at the enemy MBTs. These fights are very lengthy, but they make RNG much less relevant than in WoT encounters, and you actually have to choose where to shoot and what do to depending on the exact situation, whereas being able to pen weakspots with AP for full damage frontally would result in boring shit like in WoT where there's always only one best spot to aim for.

Do you try and pen the weak spot with AP for full damage? Do you just spam HE at the weak spot for 200 damage? Do you try to disable important modules with HE? Do you aim for the engine deck/rear half of the sides with HE to set him on fire?

If you could just pen weakspots with AP very reliably like in WoT or like T7 MBTs can pen T-80's turret, you wouldn't have any of these choices to take. It's just all about clicking the exact same weak spot in every single encounter regardless of the exact circumstances.

I don't think you understood that my post was less about balancing MBTs against each other because currently they are relatively fine, but rather that other classes grow increasingly worse as they go up the tiers in comparison to what MBTs offer. MBTs get faster, get more armor, get more/better countermeasures, get better firepower, get better view range, and get more HP. AFV view range peaks at tier 3-4, AFV camouflage peaks at tier 6, AFV mobility peaks at tier 5, AFV firepower peaks at tier 7, AFV HP is always 60% or less of that of an average MBT. You don't get anything better for moving up the tiers past a certain point in AFVs (just for example, since I'm most familiar with AFVs) but rather you just get rough equivalent stats of when they peak. 150mm penetration won't cut it at tier 9, but whereas 150mm was enough for tier 7 and 8 tank rears, 220mm can be a struggle despite the penetration actually going up. Likewise, you accelerate in 2.2s at both tier 5 and at tier 9, you don't get any faster while MBTs do.

I also don't think you understand the implications of increasing MBT populations. Light classes need other light classes to fight when MBTs are out of their reach. Almost everyone on the forum will say that to varying degrees an AFV should not be able to solo an MBT, rather it should go for other classes. But it becomes extremely difficult to "go for other classes" when 13 out of 15 players on the enemy team are driving MBTs. And no, that's not an exaggeration, tier 9 games always have a minimum of 10+ MBTs per team.

The goal of making MBTs weaker (since they are currently just a bit too good at things they shouldn't be) combined with making other classes stronger is so that there's some actual diversity at high tiers. Game balance is completely ruined when the majority of both teams are brawling in the city and the remaining few poor souls who don't like/don't want to play MBTs. I want to play AFVs, but god damn are tier 8 and 9 AFVs worthless compared to even the worst tier 9 MBT.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Intumesce said:

I don't think you understood that my post was less about balancing MBTs against each other because currently they are relatively fine

My post had two parts. Nekommando was talking about the balance of MBTs vs MBTs and I addressed that in the rest of the post when I mentioned him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In T6 and below, I Agree with Xen, knowing weakspot and all determines who wins. But beyond that it's pixel hunt, and there will be cases where said pixels don't exist/you missed by a few more pixels and bounce because RNG, yadayada. IMO I don't hate lengthy MBT vs MBT battles, it's just that getting locked in one makes things uh, unfun.

Edit; Maybe I played too much MBT-70 and think too WoT-ish, but i really like how I can just f*** off and go somewhere else when I see no chance for quick, decisive winning of a MBT vs MBT brawl. I have took on Chally Vs Chally enagements before and only won because 1. I went in with another chally, 2V1 = quick win or 2. The other guy has a T80 teammate, so he dies first-> I circle the lone chally. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Intumesce said:

but rather that other classes grow increasingly worse as they go up the tiers in comparison to what MBTs offer. MBTs get faster, get more armor, get more/better countermeasures, get better firepower, get better view range, and get more HP. AFV view range peaks at tier 3-4, AFV camouflage peaks at tier 6, AFV mobility peaks at tier 5, AFV firepower peaks at tier 7, AFV HP is always 60% or less of that of an average MBT. You don't get anything better for moving up the tiers past a certain point in AFVs (just for example, since I'm most familiar with AFVs) but rather you just get rough equivalent stats of when they peak. 150mm penetration won't cut it at tier 9, but whereas 150mm was enough for tier 7 and 8 tank rears, 220mm can be a struggle despite the penetration actually going up. Likewise, you accelerate in 2.2s at both tier 5 and at tier 9, you don't get any faster while MBTs do.

I also don't think you understand the implications of increasing MBT populations. Light classes need other light classes to fight when MBTs are out of their reach. Almost everyone on the forum will say that to varying degrees an AFV should not be able to solo an MBT, rather it should go for other classes. But it becomes extremely difficult to "go for other classes" when 13 out of 15 players on the enemy team are driving MBTs. And no, that's not an exaggeration, tier 9 games always have a minimum of 10+ MBTs per team.

The goal of making MBTs weaker (since they are currently just a bit too good at things they shouldn't be) combined with making other classes stronger is so that there's some actual diversity at high tiers. Game balance is completely ruined when the majority of both teams are brawling in the city and the remaining few poor souls who don't like/don't want to play MBTs. I want to play AFVs, but god damn are tier 8 and 9 AFVs worthless compared to even the worst tier 9 MBT.

I cannot comment on T8/T9 battles, since I only ever get there when the MM doesn't have enough players in the queue, but at least at T7 I really don't see a problem at all. Non-MBTs are supposed to take supporting roles, you're not supposed to be equally powerful. If you want to make all the difference on your own and carry shit, play MBTs. You won't play a medic in a war game and complain that you cannot kill as effectively as a sniper, and you won't play a support in DotA/League and complain about the carry stealing all "your" kills.

As I said, I agree that MBTs need their mobility nerfed a bit, but other than that, I really honestly don't see a problem, at least on T7.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Xen said:

My post had two parts. Nekommando was talking about the balance of MBTs vs MBTs and I addressed that in the rest of the post when I mentioned him.

In that case, I'll only directly address the part I assume you meant for me.
 

19 minutes ago, Xen said:

There are plenty of routes MBTs cannot take because they'll get shat on by arty, meaning they can get flanked in mid/late game rather easily, and they get outspotted by TDs, AFVs and LTs, so they rely on the ones on their own team and can get outplayed by the ones on the enemy team.

The only time I feel restricted by my mobility or camouflage is in the Challenger 2 on maps like Pipelines or Reactor when my platoonmate is in a CRAB and he wants to go somewhere but I'm not fast enough to support him. Other than that I feel every bit as capable of going to location A or B as I do in my AFVs.
Being outspotted by TDs, AFVs, and LTs doesn't matter much when AFVs need to get to your rear armor (or engine deck side armor AT BEST) and LTs and TDs can't do anything to you as long as you keep your front pointed to them. The only time you have reason to be scared in an MBT when you get spotted is if you're 100% certain arty is focusing you alone or when you know you will get rushed by multiple vehicles, but in that scenario ANY tank is dead anyway and if anything MBTs have the highest chance of coming out on top in a scenario like that.

The only real use I have for AFVs (like my aforementioned CRAB platoonmate) when I'm driving an MBT is just for convenience so he can spot ahead for me so I can charge in and mop up then move to the next flank. I don't need that view range but I guess it's nice to potentially know what I'm coming up against.

MBTs are incredibly self-reliant at high tiers and also respond way too well to being flanked by classes that can only deal their damage to them via flanking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Nekommando said:

In T6 and below, I Agree with Xen, knowing weakspot and all determines who wins. But beyond that it's pixel hunt, and there will be cases where said pixels don't exist/you missed by a few more pixels and bounce because RNG, yadayada. IMO I don't hate lengthy MBT vs MBT battles, it's just that getting locked in one makes things uh, unfun.

I think you don't understand. If you choose to hunt the pixel and take a high risk high reward shot with AP that's your choice. But at the same time you could have chosen to just shoot HE at various weak spots of your choice, depending on what you want to achieve. From t2 to T5, T6 to a lesser extent, MBT gameplay was boring as shit AP/HEAT@weakspot sniping like in WoT. Having the choice between AP/HEAT and HE depending on the exact situation and your approach and goal adds a lot to MBT vs MBT gameplay at T7+.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Xen said:

I cannot comment on T8/T9 battles, since I only ever get there when the MM doesn't have enough players in the queue, but at least at T7 I really don't see a problem at all. Non-MBTs are supposed to take supporting roles, you're not supposed to be equally powerful. If you want to make all the difference on your own and carry shit, play MBTs. You won't play a medic in a war game and complain that you cannot kill as effectively as a sniper, and you won't play a support in DotA/League and complain about the carry stealing all "your" kills.

As I said, I agree that MBTs need their mobility nerfed a bit, but other than that, I really honestly don't see a problem, at least on T7.

I'm willing to accept that AFVs at the very least should have a hard time against MBTs, but currently there's just so little reason to pick an AFV over an MBT.
If you go from AFV to MBT, you only sacrifice view range, camouflage, and mobility. Camouflage and view range are both poorly explained and not very relevant in the current meta with the current maps so you won't miss those much and if anything you'll welcome the tons of "spotting" damage you get from just being in brawling range of other MBTs while your teammates shoot your targets. I get easily five times as much spotting damage in my MBTs than I do in my AFVs.
Your mobility sacrifice will be hard to get used to at first, but once you get used to it MBTs really only are slow in the sense that they accelerate slowly. They still go roughly as fast as an AFV when they pick up the pace and travel via roads which are accessible thanks to your armor which holds off shots and acts as a penetration barrier ("if you're an autocannon you're just risking getting shot by shooting me") which only MBTs can get past once they are at close range.

Your firepower will be a world of difference as well. You lose burst damage but you can now actually come to the damage rather than waiting for the late game to mop up.

But when you look at non-AFVs it starts to get increasingly confusing as to why you would play them over an MBT.
The T-90MS has better DPM with better penetration and damage plus it has only a bit slower mobility with a miniscule camouflage difference but well over 5 times as much armor as an M8 does. The only differences between the two that are notable is that the M8 is more agile, its gun aims faster (but hits weaker and can't get close to the enemy) and it has more gun depression and more health. And any health advantage it may have is instantly lost by the fact it doesn't have fuck-you-autocannons level of armor.

This applies for other tanks across more tiers. It gets increasingly pointless to play anything but MBTs when you sacrifice so little to get so much in return.
And if all tanks are not meant to be roughly as strong, at least in one way or another (again, "strength" is their ability to influence the match, not explicitly how much armor, health, mobility, or firepower they have) then you should always just go for the strongest ones, which just so happens to be MBTs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Intumesce said:

Honest question: have you not played past tier 6 yet? It's very, very hard to miss how strong MBTs get at tier 7+ unless you yourself are driving an MBT and you only play when drunk. At tier 2-4 the meta is pretty AFV and TD dominant and MBTs might actually be a bit underpowered there (I haven't played them much and try to skip when possible so I can't comment on it too much) but at tier 5 and 6 everything is relatively well balanced among all classes.
At tier 7 things get odd, at tier 8 you definitely notice MBTs are stronger than what else is on display, and at tier 9 you used your tier 8 AFV tokens to get a T-90MS and a Challenger 2.

but MBT's should be strong, it's reality nowdays only thing that can kill MBT 100% is  attack helicopter, rest of vehicles are irrelevant  on battlefield 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Bekari said:

but MBT's should be strong, it's reality nowdays only thing that can kill MBT 100% is  attack helicopter, rest of vehicles are irrelevant  on battlefield 

ATGM equipped AFV's are more than capable of destroying many modern MBT's; especially AFV's with top-attack ATGM's such as the Hellfire, Javelin, Spike, TOW 2, etc. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Bekari said:

but MBT's should be strong, it's reality nowdays only thing that can kill MBT 100% is  attack helicopter, rest of vehicles are irrelevant  on battlefield 

True in real life - but applying the same power levels MBTs posses in the game will make it real boring real fast. There has to be some viable weaknesses in MBTs that skilled players can take advantage of using other vehicle classes. As it stands, MBTs move too fast (either in traverse or top speed or both), have too much armor and have negligible view range disadvantage compared to most other classes.

However, I have to say that vehicle balancing tier VI and below seems to be really good. It's just that there seems to be powercreep happening in the higher tiers right now (oh god dat side armor on the Chally 1 with upgraded chobham armor on). Still, it's not like these problems can't be fixed and I commend Obsidian for doing a relatively good job considering the young age of the game. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Bekari said:

but MBT's should be strong, it's reality nowdays only thing that can kill MBT 100% is  attack helicopter, rest of vehicles are irrelevant  on battlefield 

Assuming that's true (I'm not saying it is but for the sake of argument lets go with it), wtf does that have to do with anything?   This is a game.  Sure, MBT's should be powerful in their respective field but that doesn't mean they get to shit all over the other classes in the game.

If a t-90 over extends and isolates themselves from the rest of their team a Wiesel should be perfectly capable of punishing it, that doesn't happen at the moment with 50 degrees of turret traverse and side armor that you pen 1 in 5 shots.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • MBT armor needs to remain relevant but other classes must have a more than fair chance of damaging them, e.g. LTs and TDs should almost always be able to penetrate them in the side and autocannons should without exception pen them in the rear

This^. its not really balanced when an MBT's sides(and in some cases rear's) are almost as strong/well protected as their front. Also i think that while Frontally MBT's should be strong, they should also be vulnerable/have realistic weak-points. Things like Cupolas, Drivers Hatches, and Sights should have slightly larger hit-boxes along with slightly lower armor values. it doesn't make sense to have an MBT with maybe 1-2 of these "weak-points" that have hit-boxes the size of 2 pixels along with armor values of 500-600mm+(not even counting any sort of angling). This way Other class types (aside from maybe AFV's) can damage an MBT frontally on a more consistent basis, even if the damage is reduced.

  • MBTs should have lower view range at low tiers, starting at circa 300-320m and peaking at roughly 380m at tier 8 and not going any higher unless it truly needs the view range for whatever reason. They can be specced to have more view range just as an option but it's highly unlikely anyone will.

This is also a major problem, Out of all the classes MBT's should have the lowest average view range period(aside form arty). Obliviously MBT's should belong on the front-lines, but if they have comparable view range to TD's/LT's it will create chaos on the battlefield, i constantly find situations where i am being out-spotted by an MBT while driving both TD's and LT's (though the camo/spotting mechanics affect this too). AFV's should be the true spotters, (though this leaves LT's in an awkward place) then perhaps LT's followed by TD's with MBT's and Arty in last place.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Xen said:

I think you don't understand. If you choose to hunt the pixel and take a high risk high reward shot with AP that's your choice. But at the same time you could have chosen to just shoot HE at various weak spots of your choice, depending on what you want to achieve. From t2 to T5, T6 to a lesser extent, MBT gameplay was boring as shit AP/HEAT@weakspot sniping like in WoT. Having the choice between AP/HEAT and HE depending on the exact situation and your approach and goal adds a lot to MBT vs MBT gameplay at T7+.

you clearly havent played a t80 trying to pen a chally 2 in the side with 500mm of pen, have fun with that.

tier 7 and below i think the game is fine, tier 8 plus the game is incredibly broken you play anything other than a mbt there is no point at the moment. having to shoot HE at the front of mbts because neither of you have viable weakspots is beyond retarded. literally what happens is whoevers mbts just group up and yolo through win the game. this takes a lot of finesse and skill out of the gameplay. you talk about working with your team in mbts that is simply not true. its literally just zerging like red pubbies so you can flank and have a chance of penning with AP.

lights, TD's scale horribly with the tiers, arty and AFV's remain relevant because they have spotting capabilities and arty can rek mbts modules with HE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tier 6 seems the best to me. Every MBT has frontal weak spots that aren't pixels large, yet they still have armor and you still need to aim. Their sides and rear are weak, which is ok. I play every class, but with the chally 1 (highest tank yet) the game play is fucking retarted. Its basically 2 IS-7's face hugging each other trying to pen a "weakspot" 3 pixels wide. Whats wrong with having a weaker lower plate that you need to angle and or hide.

GIve MBT's weak spots that players can hide/make hard to hit, so that player skill has a greater influence on the outcome of a brawl.

Best example of this in WoT is the E100. Weaker LFP, turret face vulnerable to heat and police bar. Yet all those weak points can be, to a certain degree, rendered strong by good play and positioning. Side scrapping, angling turret and moving back and forth for police bar. This is what is lacking on tier 7+ MBT's in AW.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Bekari said:

but MBT's should be strong, it's reality nowdays only thing that can kill MBT 100% is  attack helicopter, rest of vehicles are irrelevant  on battlefield 

A10 Warthog says Hi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Bekari said:

but MBT's should be strong, it's reality nowdays only thing that can kill MBT 100% is  attack helicopter, rest of vehicles are irrelevant  on battlefield 

That's hilariously incorrect but if we were to entertain your "realistic" notions, you'd also be booted back to garage if you got tracked since you can't repair them mid-battle. On top of that, your engine would often die on the desert maps in anything but the most modern (high tier) vehicles, likewise booting you out of the game. Simulation sure is fun.

Obsidian should more or less do what WG did to balance heavies, just not with as many blatantly huge spots. HE spam is just dumb as fuck and requires zero skill, not to mention that MBTs make everything else irrelevant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Crossfader said:

Tier 6 seems the best to me. Every MBT has frontal weak spots that aren't pixels large, yet they still have armor and you still need to aim. Their sides and rear are weak, which is ok. I play every class, but with the chally 1 (highest tank yet) the game play is fucking retarted. Its basically 2 IS-7's face hugging each other trying to pen a "weakspot" 3 pixels wide. Whats wrong with having a weaker lower plate that you need to angle and or hide.

GIve MBT's weak spots that players can hide/make hard to hit, so that player skill has a greater influence on the outcome of a brawl.

Best example of this in WoT is the E100. Weaker LFP, turret face vulnerable to heat and police bar. Yet all those weak points can be, to a certain degree, rendered strong by good play and positioning. Side scrapping, angling turret and moving back and forth for police bar. This is what is lacking on tier 7+ MBT's in AW.

 

2 hours ago, Zinn said:

That's hilariously incorrect but if we were to entertain your "realistic" notions, you'd also be booted back to garage if you got tracked since you can't repair them mid-battle. On top of that, your engine would often die on the desert maps in anything but the most modern (high tier) vehicles, likewise booting you out of the game. Simulation sure is fun.

Obsidian should more or less do what WG did to balance heavies, just not with as many blatantly huge spots. HE spam is just dumb as fuck and requires zero skill, not to mention that MBTs make everything else irrelevant.

both these comments sum up exactly what is wrong with high tier mbts.

am i the only one that feels they made these tanks as some sort of prize for grinding through the game so the pubbies can say" wow look mom they cant do anything to me from the front!"

seriously stupid fucking shit.

Just now, Stridsvagn 74 said:

Super easy.

 

Split them from everything else. 

what is that going to achieve? considering how lower tier mbts are actually well balanced there is no reason high tier mbts cant similarly fit into the 5 class system with some fine tuning

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

make them sluggish, not slow, but unwieldy (think chally 1 with stock engine)

front side armor strong, rear side armor weaker, rear end weak

1 or 2 frontal weak spot that the player can hide/minimize

give them more HP, make them very "tanky"

nerf view range to max 400, cant go higher even with retrofits

Exp for tanking would be nice

give bonus for damage/exp under a certain distance, encourage brawling (somewhat like the TD full aim bonus)

basically 1v1 versus any other class, they should win if engaged frontally. If you out spot or flank, then its a toss up of who wins.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it wouldnt be that hard to put in exp bonuses for "tanking shots", this would be a good mechanic because if you gave them frontal weakspots it will encourage players to learn the layout of their tank in exchange for a exp reward

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...