Tanks: Public's opinion?

[Mazrix]

Good evening, good morning, short-time lurker Maz has decided to enter the boards, hoping not to wake the fury of people who know better than him.

Anyway, I'd like to know how people feel about tanks in the current build. Balance-wise mostly.


Some of you may have heard me on the servers closer to Europe, but I've actually had a couple of problems with them.
I feel that they are most of the time underpowered, not due to armor or weaponry though. More like because of their mobility, or lack of it. You see, in the current build they are barely able to traverse the maps. A 30 degree slope seems to suck out everything they've got, slowing your movement to a 20mph crawl even when using turbo. If you feel the need to reverse, you can give up any hope of getting over the smallest of hills, because you'll probably slide down it. If you find yourself low on armor, the only hope of escaping is to turn around and hit the turbo, which in itself takes time enough for the enemy to harm you even more.

I've also noticed their inability to get over the tiniest of obstacles. The best example of this probably comes from Frostbite, where the leftovers of cities have completely tank-proof chain link fences. Surely you can just shoot it down with say, an AC20, but I find it quite comical/annoying that an 80 ton tank from the 31st century moving at 70mph is helpless against the might of something as sturdy as a chain link fence.

The brakes... Well... They are slightly more effective than accelerating in the opposite direction, but I can't say more than that about them.

On the cosmetics side, I think they sound like shopping carts with too many groceries and lack the powerful feel you should get when driving a tank, but that's beside the point.


So, am I completely wrong and suspect to getting impaled by a pitchfork, or does someone agree with me even a little bit?

[HAARP]

Hit the nail on the head. Karma for you!

Also, underarmed and overpriced. RAC Demolisher for instance. 2 RAC5. Lolwut? The 55-ton Bushwacker has the same guns, plus back-up weaponry, is more maneuverable and costs less (don't quote me on that)

[Leeko]

Hit the nail on the head. Karma for you!

Also, underarmed and overpriced. RAC Demolisher for instance. 2 RAC5. Lolwut? The 55-ton Bushwacker has the same guns, plus back-up weaponry, is more maneuverable and costs less (don't quote me on that)

Though I loathe the bushwacker, QFT.
EDIT: And yeah it's really off-putting how tanks handle like they're sliding around on ice. Funny how the crysis engine doesn't apply momentum to ASF but it overdoes it to tanks.

[=KoS= Eldragon]

I agree that tanks have a mobility problem right now.  More than once I've gotten my tank stuck on a minor obstacle, or been unable to go up even a simple hill.

I'm not sure how the Oro and Demolisher should even be used. If it is supposed to be a "Shoot and Scoot" platform, the mobility needs a major boost. Can't be expected to scoot if the slowest mech in the game moves faster up a small hill than you do. If they are supposed to be a mobile heavy weapon platform, their mobility can stay the same, but they need an armor boost or reduce the purchase price to make up the difference. IMHO the Oro should be the former, and Demolisher should be the latter.

[~SJ~ Blhurr]

I think we are stuck with their mobility.  Turret shouldn't be its own hitbox or the damage should be divided out to the other hit boxes.  It would be nice if you could toggle the brake.  Also give them more guns and make them cheaper.  More weapons instead of lots of ammo 

[Redvan]

tanks are part of the MWLL easymode association.  Who needs maneuverability when you can just swivel your turret 360 degrees and continually hit your target \o/

(no, i'm not saying this as someone who's never used them, I've used them quite successfully seeing as how easy they are...)

[HAARP]

More weapons instead of lots of ammo

You're probably referring to the Demolisher. I actually like the simplicity in its weapon loadout, not to mention it is canon. It's just not as effective as many mechs in the same weight class.
If you just made the Demolisher a lot less expensive (it runs on gas for christ's sake, lol!) tanks would be used more and fulfill other roles besides being ablative armor for their Battlemech starmates.
Cheap high-firepower easily-outmaneuvered weapons platforms, here we go!

I enjoyed tanks in 0.1. They've become kind of useless in the following patches. Wish that could be addressed, because they offer a welcome alternative to mechs (even though they're less maneuverable)

[Leeko]

tanks are part of the MWLL easymode association.  Who needs maneuverability when you can just swivel your turret 360 degrees and continually hit your target \o/

(no, i'm not saying this as someone who's never used them, I've used them quite successfully seeing as how easy they are...)

Would be nice if the turret could rotate to keep up with most mechs, maybe then I would use tanks more often. Then again that could create some balance issues.

[ratbuddy]

Hit the nail on the head. Karma for you!

Also, underarmed and overpriced. RAC Demolisher for instance. 2 RAC5. Lolwut? The 55-ton Bushwacker has the same guns, plus back-up weaponry, is more maneuverable and costs less (don't quote me on that)

I agree on the price thing, but underarmed they ain't. The RAC/5 demo is a BA-eraser, does ok against mechs, and carries a crapton of spare ammo. It also has more armor than the other Demolishers, and way more than a Bushwacker.

That said.. They are too expensive, compared to mechs with similar armaments. The Huits are fine, those are rolling death machines, but the Partisans and Demolishers are priced about 25% higher than I think is fair.

Also agree on the chain link fence thing, they should just fall down without stopping the vehicle that plows through them.

[(TLL)KitLightning]

The Tanks have more armor now than at any time thou they are still under-armored imho compared to a Heavy, which is acceptable that I consider them as a support asset. However, the price should be set at half the cost to make them even in connection with their loss of armor and loadout compared to the other assets in the MOD. It would make them that more interesting to field, that currently you will not take a Demolisher if you can afford a Mech that has better mobility and loadout in the same price range. Sure a dedicated DAZ will take it at any cost.
The Breaks, lol that's an era by itself, it wont come to an abrupt halt when pushed, a Leopard Tank can come to a halt within 4 meters from full throttle. Not saying how it fares at backing and breaking which is severely bugged.

The Tanks driving should feel like an 80 ton beast fighting gravity itself not appraised by it and lifted afloat by the simplest elevation.

They should be able to crush smaller obstacles and drive up on elevation of 45 degree without loss of momentum, specially if the overdrive is used.

The Tanks should seriously have a higher mobility than they currently does *shrugs Crysis* and be able to drift with the keys "Forward+Left or Right+Breaks" hold down. This would make altering the course at an even level compared to the bipedal assets. Right

The Loadout is somewhat acceptable, thou refitting the Demolisher with a pair of MG's for BA countermeasures would be appreciated.

[Mazrix]

Oh, I actually forgot to mention, and while this is a minor point I'll say it anyway:

The tanks are very bouncy. Like they have elastic tracks.


As I said, I think for the most part that their armament is fine, with 1 or 2 exceptions, but it's the mobility I take issue with.

The Loadout is somewhat acceptable, thou refitting the Demolisher with a pair of MG's for BA countermeasures would be appreciated.

This is quite off-topic, and has surely been talked about in other threads, but do MGs even damage things anymore? I've had a few moments of seeing MG rounds collide against BA armor with next to zero results. As many of the tanks have RACs and light ACs, I think they are pretty good against BAs already.

Honestly, it's one of the only things they are good for due to their low stature and 360 degree turrets

[SquareSphere }12thVR{]

My only real beef with tanks (not counting AA tanks) is that they're too expensive to be useful when you have enough money to buy them.  If they were dropped 10-15K they would probably be used more.

Oh I wish they also had the "deploy" the Long Tom has,as an option, just so they could setup on declines without rolling down a hill.

[(TLL)Sky_walker]

These are the facts:

• Prices:
  
  • Vulture A  cheaper than Demolisher A despite of having more firepower and more equipment
  • Bushwacker B cheaper than Oro Prime despite of having more firepower and more equipment
  • Madcat MK II C cheaper than Huit B despite of having more firepower more equipment, and being mobile target
• Tanks (in general) tend to mount less weapons than Mechs do
• Tanks (in general) are more ammo-dependant than Mechs, making them require returns back to base from time to time (though they mount more ammo than Mechs do
• Tanks have less durability than Mechs:
  
  • Turret cannot be hidden - Mechs can rotate, dividing damage through sections. Only Mech part which cannot be hidden - legs - moves damn fast and is quite narrow target + it's known to cause problems
  • In worse case - tank has 5 components. Mech - 9 (nearly twice as much)
  • Tanks can rotate to avoid targets - though it doesn't negate the enemy ability to hit the weak spot. Mechs are taller, so at close range they can hit 4 out of 5 sides, with splash weapons - all 5 sides. (+ The turret always is visible - destroying it means removal of all weapons (aside from Huit) )
  • Tank turret armor is higher than comparably armed Mechs armor - yes, but still Mechs can migrate damage - tanks cannot do it that easily. Especially when you take into account a fact that (aside from point above) torso twist for Mechs is few times faster than rotation of entire tank
  • Tanks have 4/5th of components which cause instant death - that's 80% - Mechs: 22% down to 18% (depending on type)
  PS. Sorry if prices are not up to date.
  
• Tanks have less mobility.
  
  • Even assuming that current tanks mobility issues are solved: still the terrain can kill them in a second while Mechs walk as if nothing would happen
  • Mechs have Jump Jets - can get where tanks cannot.
  • Mechs have no difficulties with moving up the hill - tanks hardly even can start moving up from 0 km/h.
  • Tanks cannot stand still on the hill by them own - have to hold the X all the way along
  • Tanks have troubles with visibility (low profile) - cannot predict the obstacles and avoid them like the Mechs do
• Mechs are tall (that's both - advantage (eg. using half-cover, short popups from terrain), and disadvantage (more eye-catching) )
• Tanks aiming crosshair sky-jumps on each bump - Mechs hardly even notice

^ And now say me that it's fair to have tanks priced higher than Mechs.

Not even to mention the fact that BattleTech says that the tanks are suppose to be cheaper than Mechs.

[(TLL)KitLightning]

The tanks are very bouncy. Like they have elastic tracks.

Been like that always, blame it on Crysis.

The Loadout is somewhat acceptable, thou refitting the Demolisher with a pair of MG's for BA countermeasures would be appreciated.

This is quite off-topic...

No it isnt, you asked for my opinion which I sincerely mean I gave.

, and has surely been talked about in other threads

Not much publicly IIRC

The MG are an anti-BA weapon, and will do nothing against armored assets. The Tanks have a slow turning turret and weapons are usually having a slow ROF, e.g. AC20 or Gauss hence their support role. The Demolisher Prime and A lacks an anti-BA weapon as per TRO. RAC's and AC5 are AA weaponry not Tank weaponry

[Mazrix]

The Loadout is somewhat acceptable, thou refitting the Demolisher with a pair of MG's for BA countermeasures would be appreciated.

This is quite off-topic...

No it isnt, you asked for my opinion which I sincerely mean I gave.

Ah, sorry. I was referring to my own text with that


Heh, usually when a map is dominated by BAs, I like buying myself a tank with RACs or the mentioned AC5s. I've found them quite successful when fending off those heavy lasered fleas.