I know PS1 and PS2 have medium battle tanks... - Page 4 - PlanetSide Universe
PSU Social Facebook Twitter Twitter YouTube Steam TwitchTV
PlanetSide Universe
PSU: A local site for local people
Home Forum Chat Wiki Social AGN PS2 Stats
Notices
Go Back   PlanetSide Universe > PlanetSide Discussions > PlanetSide 2 Idea Vault

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Rating: Thread Rating: 6 votes, 3.00 average. Display Modes
Old 2012-04-12, 11:52 AM   [Ignore Me] #46
Bonius
Sergeant
 
Bonius's Avatar
 
Re: I know PS1 and PS2 have medium battle tanks...


Originally Posted by PlaceboCyanide View Post
So... your point is that another, larger tank is like day trading...
So far the only reasoning I've seen has been in the lines of "because its fun/cool". I enjoy trading with bonds, so why shouldn't they implement a day-trading system where I can trade outfit bonds?

See my point?
Bonius is offline  
Old 2012-04-12, 12:31 PM   [Ignore Me] #47
PlaceboCyanide
Staff Sergeant
 
PlaceboCyanide's Avatar
 
Re: I know PS1 and PS2 have medium battle tanks...


Originally Posted by Bonius View Post
So far the only reasoning I've seen has been in the lines of "because its fun/cool". I enjoy trading with bonds, so why shouldn't they implement a day-trading system where I can trade outfit bonds?

See my point?
no, because other points besides fun ahve been brought up- you've just ignored them
PlaceboCyanide is offline  
Old 2012-04-12, 01:12 PM   [Ignore Me] #48
Bonius
Sergeant
 
Bonius's Avatar
 
Re: I know PS1 and PS2 have medium battle tanks...


Originally Posted by PlaceboCyanide View Post
no, because other points besides fun ahve been brought up- you've just ignored them
The only constructive reasons as to why a heavy tank should exist in PS2 is because:

It would be a damage sponge ()
It would provide defensive mechanisms for friendly vehicles / infantry ()
It would be an area denial vehicle ()
It would be a spearhead in assaults ()

Other than that, I only see "because it's cool / fun". You have yet to give the whole concept other than vague balancing & gameplay descriptions.

If the vehicle would be able to do all of the above, there would be absolutely no reason to field any other ground-based vehicle. The vehicle as it has been laid out right now is just not feasible in any shape or form. You cannot "balance" a vehicle by making it weak to jammer grenades, nor can you balance it by making it require lots of people.

As I stated earlier, the idea looks good on paper but there's absolutely no reason as to why it should be implemented. At all.
Bonius is offline  
Old 2012-04-12, 02:36 PM   [Ignore Me] #49
PlaceboCyanide
Staff Sergeant
 
PlaceboCyanide's Avatar
 
Re: I know PS1 and PS2 have medium battle tanks...


Idea threads are usually for brainstorming and idea collaboration - someone who joins a thread half way through doesn't take on the full responsibility of providing a 100% complete idea for another singular forum goer to approve of or deny. Bounce Ideas around that you think would solve the problems you listed instead of just going:



You say heavy tanks have absolutely no reason for existing in planetside... Why? Heavy tanks can and have served their purpose very well in real life and other videogames. Elaborate on why you think they have no redeeming value in Planetside2. oh-- and what of this conversation is not on paper? no one can say they've playtested it to see if it is as awful as you say it is off paper. One thing people could say is they've played other games with heavy tanks that work just fine on balance.


---The way I see it
Pros:
1) Heavy Armor
2) Heavy main gun

Cons:
1) Poor Maneuvering and Speed
2) Massive weight and/or size limits where the heavy tank would be able to travel (inability to climb steep hills or pathways wide enough for other tanks but tricky for heavies)
2) Slow reload time on main gun
3) Limited field of fire for main gun
4) More expensive than a MBT

Additional possibilities:
1) Defensive abilities that affect nearby infantry and/or vehicles
-----This could work like the Paladin from UT2k4 or that tank from Ground Control 2 - giving the tank this ability would of course require the trade-off of less firepower.
2) Further dampening the strength of the main gun without making it a peashooter by creating a dedicated driver to necessitate good teamwork.


Strong against stationary targets such as base turrets and enemy tankers silly enough to never move. Weak against most other things due to slow main gun and poor agility. Even though heavy tanks would have trouble with agile targets, they still mitigate or draw fire from teammates. Depending on the strength of the mounted MG's it could have pretty atrocious ability to counter air vehicles...How is this impossible to balance? I think you're creating obstacles that don't have to exist.

Feel free to bounce ideas around- that goes for anyone. Lets give SOE as many ideas to work with as we can

Last edited by PlaceboCyanide; 2012-04-12 at 02:51 PM.
PlaceboCyanide is offline  
Old 2012-04-12, 08:07 PM   [Ignore Me] #50
moosepoop
Captain
 
Re: I know PS1 and PS2 have medium battle tanks...


despite being uneffective players in ps1 repeatedly teamed up to gun the heavy transports. a multi man tank would be what everyone wants.

the nerfed bfrs were pretty balanced, there is nothing wrong with heavy units. introducing heavy tanks would remove the stigma of the bfr while maintainng the same gameplay.

heavy large units in other fps are restricted by map space. this is not an issue in ps2.




this game has massive maps, massive bases, massive number of players. it would be natural to introduct massive vehicles.
Originally Posted by Bonius View Post
As I stated earlier, the idea looks good on paper but there's absolutely no reason as to why it should be implemented. At all.
everything you said was already implemented in ps1 in the BFRs. my only complaint os BFRs needed more gunners. this can be done in ps2 with multi gunner heavy tanks.

Last edited by moosepoop; 2012-04-12 at 08:19 PM.
moosepoop is offline  
Old 2012-04-15, 12:42 AM   [Ignore Me] #51
Vectorian
Private
 
Re: I know PS1 and PS2 have medium battle tanks...


The only thing that annoyed me about BFRs in PS1 was their godlike shields and regen on it. Also the ability to have jump jets. Take those away and I wouldn't mind taking my magrider out from a distance to blast away at one and watch it eventually die from focus fire.
Vectorian is offline  
Old 2012-04-15, 12:50 AM   [Ignore Me] #52
Red Beard
Second Lieutenant
 
Red Beard's Avatar
 
Re: I know PS1 and PS2 have medium battle tanks...


Originally Posted by PlaceboCyanide View Post
Idea threads are usually for brainstorming and idea collaboration - someone who joins a thread half way through doesn't take on the full responsibility of providing a 100% complete idea for another singular forum goer to approve of or deny. Bounce Ideas around that you think would solve the problems you listed instead of just going:
Thank you...These are brainstorming session more than "final proposals". That's all the devs are going to treat them as anyways.

Having said that, there are definetely ideas that warrant a 'no', but I see I lot of ideas proposed that, if heads would put together, would overcome problems that armchair critics often run to say 'no' to...


(Note: I am speaking generally, not specifically about this suggestion thread.)
Red Beard is offline  
Old 2012-04-16, 10:29 AM   [Ignore Me] #53
Marinealver
Sergeant Major
 
Marinealver's Avatar
 
Re: I know PS1 and PS2 have medium battle tanks...


The heavy tanks in PS 1 were the BFRS. But now since all tanks are lightnings wiht MBT weapons and armor *sigh* I almost say I am dreading the release of PS2.
Marinealver is offline  
Old 2012-06-13, 02:39 PM   [Ignore Me] #54
super pretendo
First Sergeant
 
Re: I know PS1 and PS2 have medium battle tanks...


How do you mean they are lightnings with MBT weapons and armor?
super pretendo is offline  
Old 2012-06-13, 04:21 PM   [Ignore Me] #55
kunzadar
Corporal
 
kunzadar's Avatar
 
Re: I know PS1 and PS2 have medium battle tanks...


Yeah really. Aren't the weapons and armor the only crucial and distinguishing features of tanks?
kunzadar is offline  
Old 2012-06-13, 05:52 PM   [Ignore Me] #56
Saifoda
Sergeant Major
 
Saifoda's Avatar
 
Re: I know PS1 and PS2 have medium battle tanks...


Originally Posted by PlaceboCyanide View Post
^The only thing this subforum is for.
Saifoda is offline  
Old 2012-06-13, 06:41 PM   [Ignore Me] #57
RovingDeath
Sergeant
 
RovingDeath's Avatar
 
Re: I know PS1 and PS2 have medium battle tanks...


Originally Posted by Erendil View Post
This. Within the context of the Planetside gameworld "MBT" has always referred to Medium Battle Tank. Just go here and read the description of the Van/Mag/Prowler.
LOL because wikis are always right =P If Marine Corps doctrine uses "Main" then that's my answer forever. The term is for whatever that military's "Main Battle Tank" is at the time. The wiki is wrong and SOE is wrong.

Anyway, I'm going to have to say that heavy tanks are a bad idea; we saw what they did in the form of BFRs. BFRs can be balanced, yes, but that balancing diminishes their role so much that it can easily be replaced by other units (like tanks). Hell, the lightning barely has a place anymore, but it still gets to stay because of its speed. It's more of an "LAV" than anything else, minus the troop transporting capacity and limited amphibious capability.

If I want to pilot a mech, I'll go play Mech Warrior Online, which sounds freaking sweet by the way. But just imagine the hate we would see aimed at BFRs, quoting Mech Warrior's superior mech gameplay!

Heavy tanks are cool, and have their place in games like Command and Conquer, but I think that's just too much firepower to exist in one unit in an FPS of this magnitude.
RovingDeath is offline  
Old 2012-06-14, 12:04 AM   [Ignore Me] #58
super pretendo
First Sergeant
 
Re: I know PS1 and PS2 have medium battle tanks...


The only balance that needs to happen is two things
1: Their firepower/armor will be LESS than the equivalent cost of many units
2: requires many players to operate at full efficiency
3: much of their role is SUPPORT rather than just gunshooting firepower

EVE does this successfully. Titans are the best ship in the game statwise, but with their cost you could get something like 100 carriers.

Let heavy tanks be support for other vehicles, and provide bonuses and command abilities etc. Using them as unique command platforms with much heavier armor and weapons than MBTs (but not ludicrously) is the easiest to balance.

Last edited by super pretendo; 2012-06-14 at 12:06 AM.
super pretendo is offline  
Old 2012-06-14, 09:05 AM   [Ignore Me] #59
Baneblade
Contributor
Lieutenant General
 
Baneblade's Avatar
 
Re: I know PS1 and PS2 have medium battle tanks...


Even if the Mag, Prowler, and Vanguard are Main Battle Tanks, that does not preclude a heavier tank from existence.
Baneblade is offline  
Old 2012-06-15, 06:47 AM   [Ignore Me] #60
AssassinGT
Private
 
AssassinGT's Avatar
 
Re: I know PS1 and PS2 have medium battle tanks...


I agree with the above post that it was basically just BFRs.. and they can work if they got real with it. The way I see it.. Robots don't fly.. and they shouldn't ever fly. Cause if they did we're all doomed.
AssassinGT is offline  
 
  PlanetSide Universe > PlanetSide Discussions > PlanetSide 2 Idea Vault

Bookmarks

Discord

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:34 PM.

Content © 2002-2013, PlanetSide-Universe.com, All rights reserved.
PlanetSide and the SOE logo are registered trademarks of Sony Online Entertainment Inc. © 2004 Sony Online Entertainment Inc. All rights reserved.
All other trademarks or tradenames are properties of their respective owners.
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.