Originally Posted by BruTaL
Typical,games like battlefield has made people think tanks are only meant to battle other tanks.Think for a moment why do you think the prowler as the biggest splash damage and anchor mode?
It's not like the only way to kill other tanks is by using tanks, i can see the vision the devs had with each tank but some gamers just don't see it,they think it's all about just running in there and then dieing and start raging.
Look,up close the magrider would lose to the vanguard with it's armor and shield,it would also lose to the prowler with it's rof and vulcan.The only reason why the magrider has a higher k/d is because it's mostly used at range.Just learn to use your strengths and weaknesses,where's the fun in this game if everything is the same?
We could sit here and argue all day,some people just need to learn.
|
Uh-huh. Statements like the ones that Higby has made is what makes be think that the MBTs are meant to primarily fight each other, or rather their primary role is to defeat enemy armor, that does not mean that they will not fulfill, or otherwise support in, other roles like that of anti-infantry. Also the HEAT rounds have the same splash area, the Vanguard's AP and both the Magrider and Prowler have the same HE splash. They all deal the same indirect damage. So you're basing your argument on a faulty basis.
Please do explain how us "gamers" are unable to understand the primary goal of the MBT, which is to deal with enemy armor? What exactly does primary role have have to do with "but some gamers just don't see it,they think it's all about just running in there and then dieing and start raging." Since it's primarily longe range engagements that people are complaining about, when it comes to balance between the three MBTS. Seems like just a silly straw man argument.
Please don't start using the old and tired "learn to play" arugment. It is bs in this argument since all MBTs HAVE to be able to compete against each other in longer range engagements, unless they radically change the way the tanks work (for example revamp the Prowler for nothing but close combat). As evident by Higby's statements.
Yes, some poeple need to learn the MBT's primary role. Again please do stop it with the "learn to play" arguments.
Originally Posted by PeanutMF
I agree.
If tanks were made to fight other tanks, then what was the purpose of making them in the first place?
This is probably what makes the Vanguard overall the weakest tank (imo) since it's mediocre at anti-infantry and its anti-tank ability is still bested by the magrider at all ranges except close up.
If you manage to destroy all the opposing armour in the area with a Vanguard you can't support your infantry as well as you could in a Mag or a Prowler.
While with a Prowler destroying the opposing armour in the area might be more difficult, but you will be laughing all the way to the bank with mopping up the infantry afterwards.
And to be frank I'm okay with the Vanguard being rather bad at killing infantry compared to the other tanks, but it needs to be better in other areas.
|
What a silly question? They were of course made to be the backbone in any groundbased engagement. That does
not mean that, that is all they are good for. Again, this is an misinterpretation.
All MBTs are more than capable of dealing with infantry. The only real reason as to why the Prowler is better at killing infantry is because of its dual barrels. When other MBTs fire at infantry it's just overkill, when Prowlers fire it's less overkill times 2, as in you can apply the max damage across a larger area faster than any other MBT. Why do you think that they want to change The Vanguard's long range capabilities against the Magrider?
Not as well as the Prowler perhaps, but the Magrider and Vanguard are basicly equal in this area. The Saron certainly make it far easier to snipe infantry, good thing it's getting a nerf then.
Which is
not the point of the Prowler.
"[...]due largely to the Prowler's higher capacity for farming infantry, but again, we want to make sure tanks are tuned around combat with other tanks, not combat with infantry, and large changes were and are warranted to bring them into line."
It's not bad at killing infantry.