NS MBT. - Page 2

ChipMHazard · 2014-01-10, 06:04 AM

Originally Posted by almalino

I liked BF2142 super slow, super protected but not that super overpower tank. To kill it you need to destroy 4 shield generators on the sides first. And tank was not just a normal tank but had a special purpose to allow attackers to reach enemy base using it that otherwise was pretty tough. I guess similar mechanics could be applied here?

Sadly I think it's just going to be a 3+ crew tank, and that's it. I doubt they are going to be doing anything special with it.
Ideally I would have preferred to see the current MBTs become 3+, but we already knew there wasn't much of a chance of that happening.
My main concern with this is that if this tank is just as easy to field then it might make the current MBTs less viable, or at least make them compete even more with the Lightning.
I'm wondering what kind of limitation this MBT is going to have and [obviously] just how powerful it's going to be. In other words, is it going to be a better version of the current MBTs?

While I agree with Threat and his opinion about the design... Meh, I can't be bothered to really care

PredatorFour · 2014-01-10, 06:16 AM

Meh, it's still gunna die to a guy on the back of my flash lobbing c4 onto it. Just like the others

HereticusXZ · 2014-01-10, 06:32 AM

Also... alot can change between the base model they teased and what actually makes it into the live game, but with that said... It totally looks to wide, it probably won't fit down alot of roads - Off the top of my head Broken Arch Road on Indar, or even driving around the Crown!

HereticusXZ · 2014-01-10, 06:38 AM

Originally Posted by ChipMHazard

My main concern with this is that if this tank is just as easy to field then it might make the current MBTs less viable, or at least make them compete even more with the Lightning.

I don't think it will devalue Lightnings or MBT's. Unless the NS-MBT gets a Skyguard or can apply a faction specific ability (Anchor, Shield, Magburner/Strafing or whatever new ability the devs invent).

Also speaking on Lightnings... I love my Lightning Tank with IR Smoke, Stealth, and Rival chassis. The tanks immunity to small arms, a small enough profile for my needs to flank, and it has a HEAT Cannon! NS or Faction Specific - No tank can touch my Lightning as a ambush fighter!

ChipMHazard · 2014-01-10, 07:23 AM

Originally Posted by HereticusXZ

I don't think it will devalue Lightnings or MBT's. Unless the NS-MBT gets a Skyguard or can apply a faction specific ability (Anchor, Shield, Magburner/Strafing or whatever new ability the devs invent).

Sorry, I meant make the current MBT compete more with the Lightning. The Lightning will still be the premier one man tank. I could see this MBT replacing the current MBT in organized fights, depending on what limitations it ends up having of course.

Plaqueis · 2014-01-10, 08:06 AM

First thing that came to my mind from that pic was this piece of s**t (with a broken 'stick' part):

I have no opinion about the actual topic. :P

Shamrock · 2014-01-10, 08:40 AM

Baneblade superheavy's , every tank crews dream. "Releasing eleven barrels of HELL! All Guardsmen, FOLLOW ME TO GLORY!" —Kronus 1st Liberators Baneblade Tank Commander on his external Vox-caster

http://warhammer40k.wikia.com/wiki/Baneblade

What we appear to have in the above image is a Mammoth tank lookalike, which is no bad thing, I like the design for a sci fi tank, also an NS MBT would be a cool idea.

MaxDamage · 2014-01-10, 08:42 AM

Originally Posted by AThreatToYou

That thing looks like it has a number of suspension-of-belief issues.'

A) It looks super-easy to "track" the vehicle, rendering it immobilized. There are no track guards, the tracks are prominently displayed in the front, and to boot there are multiple tracks making it easier hit any one of them. Although I guess it does have redundancy going for it.
B) There's no tread on the tracks. To boot, the tracks look shiny. That thing looks like it would slip around uselessly.
C) There's no suspension supporting the center of mass of the tank, that is, underneath the turret. Sure it would still work, but imagine what recoil would do to it, and how easy it would be for it to get stuck. Also imagine engineering a transmission to handle 6-12 different drive wheels simultaneously in all gears.
D) There's no mudguards on the track. C'mon SOE, even pre-WWII tanks had mudguards.

E) The tank's hull appearance does not lead me to believe this vehicle could possibly have a good armor configuration. You want a minimum of pits and crevices as these create weakspots, not for shots to penetrate but for explosive shockwaves to reverberate.
F) It seems some "mechanics" are showing out of the front of this tank, such as vents. Are you retarded? Do you want them to be able to fire a pistol right into your tank, through this port, through the front?
G) Those rounded "turret" sections on the left and right of the front are just plain stupid. The armor on those is flat; an APDS/APFSDS shell would go right through them.
F) That turret is your average tidbit of sci-fi baggery. That's fine. But my complaint is that there appears to be no mantlet. When the front of the turret is where the guns are, and the front of the turret is always facing the enemy, I don't know when you would not want a thickly armored front turret section. Like a mantlet. At least the gun barrels themselves look armored.

In short, this thing looks retarded. SOE please have your art department research how tanks actually work, and how tank armor actually works. Cause this thing looks like a lightly armored vehicle to me. It makes no effort to have a good armor configuration, so it looks lightly armored and fast.

Sci-fi up a T-54/T-55 with your double-barrels stuff and it'll look better than this....

Nanites pretty much account for all of the issues mentioned here.

It looks like it's meant to be hard hitting, at the cost of extreme vulnerability.

AThreatToYou · 2014-01-10, 09:38 AM

It looks like it's meant to be hard hitting, at the cost of extreme vulnerability.

Ok. OK. I accept this.

Originally Posted by Shamrock

What we appear to have in the above image is a Mammoth tank lookalike, which is no bad thing, I like the design for a sci fi tank, also an NS MBT would be a cool idea.

But let's be serious... that tank doesn't look like a useless piece of shit. What we have here does.

Originally Posted by HereticusXZ

Reminds me of the American T28 Super Heavy Tank from near the end of WW2

That's what first came to mind for me as well. Oh and for the record, that's a T95. Both it and the T28 were assault guns/TDs.

Emperor Newt · 2014-01-10, 10:24 AM

Originally Posted by HereticusXZ

Also... alot can change between the base model they teased and what actually makes it into the live game, but with that said...

Also... did actually anything they teased this way get into the game?
By now these teases are merely marketing stunts to me. Not even worth to bother anymore. Artificial hype.

Wargrim · 2014-01-10, 10:27 AM

It has 2 barels, so clearly it should belong to the TR.

I just want one thing for this tank: It should be able to drive over hostile tanks and CRUSH THEM, without getting killed by the debris. The only thing that is possibly better than running over squishy infantry in a tank is to run over squishy tanks in a motherfucking huge monster of a tank.

Oty · 2014-01-10, 10:35 AM

Originally Posted by MaxDamage

Nanites pretty much account for all of the issues mentioned here.

It looks like it's meant to be hard hitting, at the cost of extreme vulnerability.

well, even if it is possible to use the "magic" nanites card on this one, I dont completely agree with you.

If nanites solved this then why is all of the other armoured vechicles built in a more protected way? even the NS ligthing which also has 4 sets of track has all four of them well protected with sideguards.
(I know you probably just stated what the devs would explain it with

)

Even though I think the model look good from a purely esteathic/combat cool point of view, I'm gonna go with Athreattoyou and say that it doesnt look like a tank that would ever go into production due to all the impracticalities.

when I look close on the front tracks I notice the following: The point of where the weigth of the tank rests on the "inside of the tracks" (dont know the word) is so far back that there is just air underneath. considering the presumed big size and heavy weight of the tank --> would not the shear stress break the front traks rigth off and render the tank immobile? (maybe some engeneer could correct me on this?)

But It has got potential to be cool. Just put the front tracks further back and put protection on them like there is on the ligthing. also some slanted armour on the front and we are good to go.

hiddenblade · 2014-01-10, 02:30 PM

Personally I think that it looks awesome. I can't wait to see it in game or on the pts.

VaderShake · 2014-01-10, 02:47 PM

Originally Posted by almalino

I liked BF2142 super slow, super protected but not that super overpower tank. To kill it you need to destroy 4 shield generators on the sides first. And tank was not just a normal tank but had a special purpose to allow attackers to reach enemy base using it that otherwise was pretty tough. I guess similar mechanics could be applied here?

The BF2142 Goliath was more of a siege weapon/platform than an offensive powerhouse. With some team work you could take it out after a good 3-5 minutes of focused fire and that was on a BF2142 chokepoint style map. On open terrain like PS2 with so many enemies and aircraft it would not last long and would need to be much tougher or used in masses to be effective.

VaderShake · 2014-01-10, 02:53 PM

Originally Posted by Chewy

Command center was tonight and as normal, a teaser was flashed.

Could be 2-3 player (see hatches) co-op tank/artillery option for PS2. I think the styling could be more a combination of all empires, 2 barrel = TR, Slow Moving Heavy Armored = NC, Energy Shells like a Giant lasher = VS????? Just speculation but they could pull that off.