make it so people cant 1 man army the armor

[uneven valve]

like MFs be out here, killing any kind of armor instantly with C4 soon as I leave the safe zone, this also causes all armor mains to play like losers and never push the front. ive gone entire games without seeing armor because of these people. and tbh im kinda seeing their POV. its too easy to kill armor go from 100 to 0 in an instant because bro has c4 and would rather cross the entire map to kill you instead of playing the OBJ, mainly because the armor wont push the OBJ

[jagged shard]

fucks an armor
a tank?

[uneven valve]

tanks and btr

[jagged shard]

just shoot the guy 🧠

[uneven valve]

🤔 why didnt i think of that

must be the lead paint

[tender mirage]

dont let them get close enough to c4 if your talking about wearing exo heavy etc

oh tanks

[quasi sequoia]

Ye vehicle combat still has not gotten rework

It is on the agenda

[magic condor]

Clear and advance.
Flank.
Outsmart > Outplay.

[agile plume]

Who's agenda? Dev's?

[agile plume]

Yeahh, no.

To easy to be 'outsmarted' because of good flanks and fucktone of visual cover.
'Outplaying' also is banal when you have tools that instakill everything on 15m radious.

[fickle marsh]

everything including youself lol
thrown C4 is not that instant for 15meters, you can be killed already with a close range weapon

[gritty pike]

Players dont c4 tanks because its too easy. They do it because of the impact tanks make when played well. A single tank can kill multiple players with a single shot from range over and over again. I've seen tanks dominating and im definitely going to try bring them down when they do by any means

[agile plume]

They do it because its important yes. But it's also to easy making vehicles gameplay bad, u revarding and not enjoyable. It also makes tham useles in 90% of cases, because they are dead or stay in safe zone

Doesn't stike me as good gameplay design

[agile plume]

I want to see those tanks 'dominating'. Some sort of a proof, like video or sth. Because I didn't seen that in my 500h of playing. I do seen tanks evaporated instantly right outside safezone tho

[gritty pike]

The ones that dominate usually keep moving

The ones that get insta killed are those that move into tight spaces. If you just walk your tank into a flag inside a city and wait you are going to get sniped.
When i say tanks i mean both the APCs and the normal tanks

The good ones kill 5 players or more for every c4/RPG player that blows them up

[magic latch]

letting someone get close enough to you to c4 is a skill issue lmao

most of the time vehicles kill eachother

[agile plume]

Explain what dominating is

For me it's like pub stomping, having duble of triple kills of next person, singlehandedly influencing a match, and being straight up MVP.

I have not seen tanks do that

I have seen them contributing, getting respectable kills, still often being outperformed by inf, and destroying enemy vehicles. But often no objectives taken, and that's the most important thing in Conq game

[agile plume]

Thight space is not necessarily 50m from safezone on Sandy or Waki, I have seen fresh vehicles die there to spawn campers

Too many times

[magic latch]

idk rather not have vehicles at top leaderboard

pretty disgusting imo

experience from battlefield with choppers destroying whole lobbies

[leaden kraken]

armor is already annoying af because people hang out in spawn areas or at extreme ranges. making it any harder to kill with c4 is not the solution to this problem as 99% of players wont even get close enough to use it. spawn areas have multiple exits usually so just go somewhere else if someone has a trap set

thats in response to the OP not you guys

[agile plume]

Then they are useless. Vehicles are power multipliers, if they are not strong, they fail at being what they are. And anyways, only good players can get to the top. Bad player, no matter if in vehicle or no will not get there

[agile plume]

If its annoying (which is 100% subjective) because they sit in spanw, make it so they don't need to sit in spawn. And if you are annoyed by thier presence alone, which is fair i guess, play any other mode than Conq and Inv

[agile plume]

I for one do not have strong feelings about how players enjoy the game, and what gameplay loops they prefere

I do not discriminate based on that

[agile plume]

That's bad balancing, and also probably on servers with AA banned, for some reason

[leaden kraken]

Im not responsible for fighting armor in a 127v127 game lmao

[west oxide]

honestly vehicles don't really need more health or offensive power on their own, they just need to be more available

they're balanced like disposable assets but have the respawn timer of game winning god weapons

[agile plume]

That's band aid, you just spam them instead of making them viable

[west oxide]

They're perfectly viable

they just have no presence

[agile plume]

No they are not

[agile plume]

Because they are underwhelming and not able to compete in environment they are in

They have survivability of BF4 vehicles in a game with 4x more players

Thier contribution to team is minimal

They can't resonably PTFO

90% of the time they die in like 3 minutes after player exits safe zone

Every other FPS on the market does them better

Even WW3 lmao

[west oxide]

BF4 vehicles were an absolute chore to deal with and should not be the goal for this game.

A well played tank or APC can absolutely decimate enemy defensive lines through sheer force or pushing flanks, but they get fucked under infantry attention

[agile plume]

They are not, unless you refuse to play engi, ground vehicles are easy to deal with. Just work with the team. Engi and a guy with soflam can clap any tank

[west oxide]

I don't really spawn camp and I can go a whole game in an APC without dying

Regularly

[agile plume]

I want to see that

[west oxide]

get like 40-50 kills in the process

it's not that hard? Especially on maps with water

[agile plume]

Yeah, that's the point, any attention from infantry fucks up vehicles that is supposed to withstand enemy attention so team can push

[agile plume]

If you are sitting in a water, you don't play lmao

It's worse than sitting in safe zone

Brainded strategy, abusing fucked up hitbox

[west oxide]

Skissue

Several maps are built around doing it

[agile plume]

None is

No map says, 'stay in the water m8'

[west oxide]

Zalfibay, wineparadise, multuislands all put major points next to ocean

[magic condor]

Skill issue

[west oxide]

Zalfibay is literally designed to encourage using the water

[agile plume]

If that was the case we would have points on islands

[agile plume]

That doesn't mean they encurage camping in water

[west oxide]

If you put the points next to ocean you're opening it up to attack from water

This is just basic logic

water armor isn't even impossible to counter, you just have to aim better with your RPGs or get a tank to help you out

APCs in water are utterly helpless facing tanks

No cover

Super fast shell that can absolutely hit them

Can't damage them back

You can't claim that vehicles are utter dogshit and can't survive outside the spawn and then immediately pivot to "water armor is an OP exploit" lmao

if anything water armor says a lot more about how easy RPGs have it normally since near misses still count on land which is how you can cheese the weakpoints even if they're not exposed

All this is sideshow though, making vehicles individually tougher won't solve the problem of bad players getting them killed instantly, it just makes that reality infinitely worse since now every tank waiting to spawn is appreciably hurting your team

good tankers can still go 60+ to 0, they're fine as they are for the top tier players

they just need to be less precious so that people are more willing to risk them

and so that new players who don't understand them can't deprive your team of vehicles the entire game

[jagged shard]

what’s going on

I see chat

[west oxide]

trying to argue that making vehicles tougher will just make them obnoxious to fight

[jagged shard]

good point, buff little bird

[west oxide]

like, here's the thing: APCs and tanks have complete immunity to guns, and that immediately makes them incredibly useful on their own since now you can really push people you otherwise couldn't

[jagged shard]

there’s so many engineers camping at spawn ready to blow them up tho

[west oxide]

True, but that's more often a map problem

sandysunset ru is basically impassable except for the road to F

and us is only marginally better

[jagged shard]

I remember old Basra tank camping 😭

[west oxide]

there's often targets that can't appreciably fight back: vehicles ostensibly hard counter snipers, for example, and they also tend to be strong against entrenched enemies at range where even hitting RPGs can get tricky

it's all about managing your risk when you're actually out there

The spawn campers are so persistent because it takes out a lot of that calculus while actually still performing useful labor for the team: they tend to defend the nearest point pretty well on account of, yknow, being there

It's very much the easiest way to help your team

but it's obnoxious

I don't care for them either

But I also totally get why they do it

If I wanted to do something about it I'd make the punishment for messing up not be "you lose the tank for the rest of the game lol"

gunvees don't have this problem because they're truly disposable and thus people risk them out on the frontier all the time

[jagged shard]

There’s 8 billion of ‘em too

[agile plume]

Some people sit with apc in the water for majority of the game and call it resonalbe and expected gameplay

Whit which I disagree

[jagged shard]

it is reasonable and expected apcs like to do jackshit

[west oxide]

if oki doesn't like water armor then he can remove APCs amphibious capability but until then it's a valid tactic lol

[agile plume]

Shouldn't be the case tho

[jagged shard]

me personally I don’t have issues with tanks or apcs cause they don’t cause me many issues

[west oxide]

Same! When I'm not in one I usually barely notice their presence

[agile plume]

No, if you want to do something about it, make it viable and incentivise more aggresive gameplay, closer to points, promote PTFO, like PS2, BF3/4/5/2042, and WW3 do.
Then if that's not enough, nerf long range capability by a little

[west oxide]

Also lamo at the fact that the majority of the time I've been talking about making tanks more willing to move out and take some risk and you basically only latched on to my passing mention of water armor

[west oxide]

and how do you do that without making them too much for marginally coordinated infantry to handle

[agile plume]

I was out of this convo for past 20 min, just coming back to reapond man

[west oxide]

More health means that it's a lot harder for lone engineers to take on anything, better weapons only makes good tankers into gods of destruction while not solving the problem for new players

Better mobility and less reliance on the resupply box are about the only safe bets I can think of but that's not what most people complain about with vehicles

[agile plume]

You make other vehicles prime AT things. So tank vs tank is fast and easy fight, not 60 sec slap fught. Then you make it totally possible for inf to take down the tank, but not as easy as rn. Limiting C4, buffing HP, make it so that it requires some cooperstion and teamwork, and isn't only selfish endeavour to kill a fully crewed tank

[west oxide]

The moment you make killing tanks a team effort is the moment that tanks stop being killed

[agile plume]

Now excuse me for a while, my train is near, brb in 10-15 min

[west oxide]

Battlebit infantry does not coordinate, and shits gotta be balanced around thst

It's a nice ideal but it simply doesn't line up with reality

[jagged shard]

exactly the reason I run littlebird and not hawk
I hate relying on others

[west oxide]

It's a lot of bystander syndrome at that point

People will see the tank, know they can't take it on alone, and thus ignore it because it's futile, and thus the tank goes unopposed

That's literally why jet players were so obnoxious back in the day

No individual infantry could really affect a good jet in any meaningful way at all so people kinda just stopped trying and thus the jets became free to farm

Shit, I see this behavior with tanks and APCs even now when they ARE fairly easy to take down on your own, since I should remind everyone that most players aren't engineers and if you're caught out by a vehicle and not already within c4 range, there is literally nothing you can do

I see so many enemies notice I'm there and just kinda stare at me while I blow them up

Some even shoot at me with their gun

[agile plume]

That's totally valid concere, but this can be balance out. You are getting shoot at by few engis at the same time alredy. If you lower 1 player power, but 3 players can steal kill a tank, it would work. Especially when you create other threats, like enemy vehicles.

[west oxide]

even that is too much IMO

You're already safe from 4/5 classes at range, you don't need to make any individual engineer weaker to encourage vehicles to push

[agile plume]

The same problem make 'play with infantry, follow the infantry, you shouldn't push without infantry' argument invalid and useless. You are alone most of the time. So if infantry will not help you, you need to fill this gap somewhat. Shits gotta be balanced around this

[west oxide]

I do think that some classes should get the proposed C2 instead of C4 so that that threat isn't so completely ever present

Particularly medic, possibly assault

definitely not recon, honestly recon gets fucked so hard that they really should have a desperation play in pocket

[agile plume]

Ps2 does this right, and no one complains about vehicles 'OP'. Even tho this game has simmialr numbers of players in simmilar space, and can even have more of them. I do invite you to see how PS2 does that

Planetside 2 I mea

[agile plume]

I can agree to that, totally resonable.

Though I think it will not fix the problem, just make it smaller

Vehicles still will camp, because you can easily spam them to death with RPG's easily

We do have BF4 damage profiles/survivability in a game with 4 times the players amount

The scale of the game, and aboundance of threats is a problem here

If you make individual, alone, player able to solo tanks, get 2-3 of them and that seal clubbing

And it's easy to get even more of them

Like I said earlier Planetside 2 does this very well

One player will very struggle to solo a MBT, for two it's possible, 3 will do it. And that's not even half of our squad size

Sprinkle in some vehicles, that are bbetter at AT than infantry, and you can deal with enemy armoru easily

[tight hawk]

I rarely ever die to c4. Don't push areas without infantry support.

Also having a fully crewed tank really helps

[agile plume]

That's you. I see vehicles die to enemy c4 very often, even with allies around them

[agile plume]

That's impossible to achive on EU, unless you have premades

And even if you have those 2 guys in your tank, they are silent, or speaking language you don't understand

That's the reality of EU servers

No one communicates

[agile plume]

Then that's players fault

They have tools, and opportunities, it's thier choice if they use them or not.

If they are able to do something, but refuse to, that's on them

Especially when there is incentive, reward, and a way to do so in place

[agile plume]

Yeah, that's funny thing

It really makes me wonder if BBR players aren't literal bots, and they are targeting players inside vehicles

[ember valve]

All for increasing the armor, but not substantially. It should take 2-3 C-4 to kill you in a LaV or BTR I think. This is coming from an armor main that can also get 50 kills no deaths in a match. Unfortunately you can't push a front in the current state - only support it. Nothing more terrifying than hearing footsteps in your armor and wondering if it's a lone saboteur that's going to end your career.

[agile plume]

2-3 c4 to kill solves nothing, because you have 6 of them

And it alredy is 2

C4 should be less available per player, or 'anti vehicle c4'

So not everyone can do AT, some can't, some can but badly, more of a detterence, and engis are engis

[ember valve]

Yes, very reasonable suggestion.

[grim flume]

how about swap out the current c4 for something like "breaching charge" which is basicaly same thing but nerfed in damaged, and then add c4 that we already have to specific class only, lets say... support ? since players tend to take heavy armors and they're generaly slower movent ?

and also limit the amount carried

for support, to have enough c4 for 1 tank, and for the "breaching charges" not more thaan 3 to blow up walls and stuff like that, id also say nerf not only damage to tanks on the breaching charges but also on players. explosives are lame.

[ember valve]

Yes, I like this a lot. Maybe just support engineer, and assault. Doesn't make too much sense for medics or snipers to have them IMO.

[agile plume]

That's a old idea at this point

But yeah

[ember valve]

This coming from a medic.

[agile plume]

A good one

[grim flume]

engineers has rpg's which is already an issue with the 6 rocket capacity

[west oxide]

Recons should get C4 because sniper positions are one of the most vulnerable to vehicles

Vehicles basically hard counter snipers

[stark axle]

get that 5 kills one time and everyone in the area swtiches to enginner to kill you

[west oxide]

They should have the option to punish overconfident vehicles that push up on them

[grim flume]

you dont even have to swithc, regular c4 spam and ur gone

[stark axle]

really not

if you are a far away sniper they have to go trough your team to kill you to push on you

[grim flume]

i dont get to play with heavy vechicles much but when i do i tend to stay away from urban areas because of the fact that every idiot can basicaly insta kill you

[west oxide]

They do though? Vehicles can attack sniper positions with more or less complete impunity, unless the sniper just so happens to be with an engi friend

[stark axle]

with even if the kill you they are now deep in enemy lines

[west oxide]

I do it all the time in an APC, snipers are the easiest kills of all

[stark axle]

no one will miss the opportunity to kill a lonely tank

[west oxide]

you'd be surprised how often they do

[ember valve]

I think that would just add to the benefit of playing with a diversified squad of roles. Would be good for snipers to have engineer and medic support in their post.

[stark axle]

also why would you hard focus a sniper and not the 126 players that can reliable kill you

[west oxide]

Except it wouldn't because the medic and engi would usually have nothing to do

[ember valve]

Medic and engi have things to do if it's in a real location and not a meme sniper den in the corner of the map.

[west oxide]

Because it's easy? And they're usually in your way while you're moving into the enemy back line

[grim flume]

give javlins to snipers lmao

[stark axle]

i dont think no one will do that, specially that everyone can damage you so easy

[west oxide]

like, snipers are just fish food to vehicles, they're completely helpless

without c4 that is

And honestly most recons don't even carry c4

[grim flume]

bye bye choppers and spawn camping tanks

[stark axle]

thats kinda the problem with armour vehicles and giving sniper something to fight tanks makes it worse

[ember valve]

Amen.

[west oxide]

Except that on the wide flanks c4 rushing is really hard against an attentive vehicle

I'd know because I kill a lot of people who think they're clever lol

Out there engis are really your only hope

[stark axle]

if you are focusin on a sniper, how can you e focused on our surroundings

[agile plume]

I can see that, somehwat. But C4 will not help you when tank destroyed your wind turbine

[stark axle]

and relying on your team doesnt help at all

[west oxide]

i think you vastly overestimate how much attention it takes to kill a sniper in an APC or tank

[stark axle]

i still remember a medic just planjting c4 on a tank while teammates were nearby

[west oxide]

It bears repeating: most recons literally cannot hurt you, period, and even the ones that could can't do it without being effectively right next to you

If you're even 50m away, they are completely screwed

[stark axle]

isnt sniper 50m away screwed in general against everyone

not just tanks

[west oxide]

Giving recons c4 gives them the option to at least punish very overconfident vehicles that think they can just waltz up to their position without concern

[stark axle]

more if he is using bolt rifles

with they can make life easier if they are usings dmrs or something like g3 that can make them hold their own

[west oxide]

It won't change the situation significantly but it gives recons an option to deal with an enemy that otherwise will win every single possible engagement

[ember valve]

Not like I should have a significant say, but I would still take it away from medics and snipers. This would prod players to play more like their class and incentivize more variety in classes (lots of medics and snipers). And, needless to say, this will help with the original issue in the post - 1 man armies on armor.

[west oxide]

I'd even go so far as to argue that recon is the only class that absolutely needs c4 specifically. For every other class it's something you take an opportunity with, or for engineer it's just More Fuck You to vehicles, whereas with recons they literally do not have any other anti vehicle option while also being the easiest possible prey for vehicles, being usually isolated and on the flanks where vehicles like to be

[agile plume]

Snipers should keep it, same as engis and support. Assault and Medci should have AT "c4'

[stark axle]

tanks in general shoudnt have to worry about every class being able to hurt them in the same effect as the c4 we have, medics being a good example before, having the ability to heal and good weapons was worth in almost every situation, and having the c4 to deal with crowds and tanks was just an ice on top that made the class stronger

i woulld be ok if c4 was mainly a movement tool that could deal damage but not on the same level as now

[west oxide]

Medics are the one class I think absolutely does not need C4 and should get C2 instead

Engineer could arguably do without it since they have AV mines and the RPG

[stark axle]

while what people said to have a at c4 that cant blow holes reliable but deals more damage

because if i see a engie in a building and 2 medics with c4 coming to me, im just dead or heavly damaged no matter who i choose to kill

[ember valve]

If anti-tank C4 exists in the real world then I'm for it. If it doesn't I'd like to keep things semi-realistic.

[stark axle]

realism should be a second thought in most cases

[ember valve]

Ah, well lots of things to discuss going forward I guess. I have played my part here. Best of luck for whatever changes are made to the game.

One last thing I'll post regarding this that came from a friend:
"I think this is still COD mindset - 'If a tank rushes ME, then I need to be the one to knock it out'"
"It gives recon an option" - they don't need that option, because they should not be an anti-tank role

[gritty pike]

Dominating at its role would be a better way to say it. I dont mean MVP in the game like 1st player.
This game is centered around infantry as far as i can see. The devs dont want to add attack helis with missiles for that reason.
They dont want the full battlefield way of being able to be the best player while driving a tank or chopper and they have balanced the game around that idea.
Tanks dominating in their role is basically supporting a team push without advancing themselves until the team has caught up with them.
They are the ones that can get a lot of kills when playing safe but will get destroyed if they just go in to clear or hold a flag. Thats not their role as far as i can see. Their role is to supress and kill enemies. Especially enemies that are all blobbed up together

They can bring lots of value to the team without being top 10 at the end of the game

[west oxide]

they also are very good at breaking enemy lines through flank attacks

[gritty pike]

And i dont mind that. Now if you were to make them strong enough to get the MVP spot reliably you might as well add attack helis and jets too and make vehicles overall stronger

[west oxide]

If a tank rushes a recon, the recon is most likely the only one out there. I get that "CoD" is shorthand for "anything I don't like" around here but that's just a stupid psychoanalysis especially since you're talking to someone who speaks from the perspective of a tanker who constantly merks recons that had no real way of dealing with me to begin with

I'm giving them an olive branch here. I know exactly what I can do to them, and I'd prefer if they at least have some way to make me worry about them a little bit because I think it's healthy that vehicles are about as scared of infantry as the infantry is of them

[agile plume]

'Tanks dominating in thier role' is definitely something different than saying 'tanks dominate the game'

[agile plume]

I don't see that. Unless yoy focus heavily on destroying enemy armour, you don't bring much to the team. But you are bad at it, by design. You can't PTFO, you can't Cap objectives. You can get kills easily, but kills of individual don't contribute to victory nearly as much capturing and holding objectives, something vehicles are bad at, with the exception of helicopters.

[agile plume]

And the balance that makes the game inf focused also makes for bad vehicle gameplay. Not really enjoyable, second tier expireence in a game with amazing gunplay,gameplay and overall expireence.
It's too hard for a new player to learn it (major of vehicles die in like 5 min top), it's hard to express skill also. Gameplay lacks depht, especially in comparison to any other FPS game that features vehicles in the market, including barely living WW3.
There is lack of gratification (no skins/rewards)
The balancing in favour of infantry (one player able to destroy multiple tanks even without being engi, 2 is multiple), just makes for bad expireence.

And that's affects all vehicles, even helis, tho thier gameplay utility is better than AFV's

[gritty pike]

Well im down for both approaches. I dont mind the battlefield or battlebit approach. One has vehicles play as a support role the other allows them to be kings. Its up to the devs to decide how they want vehicles to play out

[gritty pike]

You do PTFO. As a supporting vehicle. You dont cap the flag directly but you help the infantry cap it by taking out threats and forcing enemy infantry to hide or destroy their cover

PTFO isnt just go to the flag and take it in conquest

[agile plume]

Well you are right, you do PTFO. Not nearly as much as average player can. Even though you are a power multiplier.

[agile plume]

I definitely wouldn't call BF vehicles kings. Unless you play on server with no AA and you are good pilot.
BF vehicles are perfect example power multiplier. They can be extremely usefull in a good coordinated team, but they will not do much in a bad team. Especially when you add teamplay, something we very much lack, then good vehicle player multiplies his good team. Alone, in bad team, he will not achive as much.

[real pond]

C4 isn't a problem if you have dismounts. Similar to irl solo vehicles tend to be sitting ducks for infantry.

The "problem" is vehicles require team play do if you're trying to solo play without a squad you're going to get smoked but with a good squad around you they become super op on certain maps

The issue with balance is that if you make them strong by themselves they become too strong with a supporting squad and imbalance. Remember blawks before the balances where 1 squad could basically dominate an entire game

[ember valve]

This! We really need to publish some doctrine on the proper use of armor.

That being said, I really like the prior suggestion to handle this by nerfing C4. Either the quantity available or limiting it to certain classes to enhance squad-based play.

[stark axle]

this isnt a case for tanks, even with a good squad you are still going to get outnumbered so easy and your teammates wont care about repairing and protecting you that you simply arent able to do a good job

c4 may not be the main problem but it helps it to be worse than it should since almost everyone is a threat to you and can kill you

[agile plume]

'With a good squad around...' ...
And how often that happens? I can't get 7 premades to basically babysit me.
Team play is in such bad state that even devs acknowledge that.
Communication on EU boils down to silence or 'ja nie panimaiu' from the more vocal russians

I suppose having a squad would change things up, if that was possible and more importantly if that was CONSISTENT

But what is consistent is how good against vehicles and how easy to use and how avalibe C4 is.
There is no Conq/INV game without few vehicles geting blown up by randoms that were just passing by

I mean, IF YOU can get to play with whole squad, that takes C4 problem out of you, then I very much envy you

But I am also sure that vast majority does not have acces to that

[west oxide]

one thing I have an issue with is that an expectation a lot of people have is that a tank should be able to just roll right onto the point and cap

like, is that not what y'all mean when you say tanks don't PTFO?

That they do not physically park on the capture point?

I feel like that's genuinely asking too much of the tanks

Even tanks themselves, which arguably have the best overall situational awareness of all the G R O U N D vehicles, have fairly poor situational awareness without an incredibly good and communicative squad

They can't use buildings for cover, which most points have many of

Like, frankly that expectation is half why I see most new players drive their tank straight into an enemy defensive line and get merked

[jagged shard]

helicopter awareness awareness day when

[west oxide]

touché

fixed

[gritty pike]

In bf tanks can cap points. Still at the cosy of being blown up but they are more powerful as vehicles

I think you either make vehicles more powerful or you just leave them on their current infantry supporting role

[west oxide]

I'm very much on the side of "support" even as a vehicle player. I fuckin hated fighting vehicles in BF4

obnoxious

and I'm a lifelong engi player

[jagged shard]

thx

[gritty pike]

Nerfing AT equipment is a bandaid fix imo that will just lead to multiple nerfs and buffs over and over to tanks and AT equipment

[west oxide]

I like the balance now where both vehicles and infantry need to respect each other's capabilities in a fight

[west oxide]

I don't think depriving medics of c4 would noticeably harm anything tbh

Probably be good for the game since it'll punish lone wolf medics the hardest lol

[gritty pike]

Thats just removing them from the medic class

I was referring to changing the power of AT equipment

Like making c4 worse. That will just lead to people spamming rpgs. Then someone will ask for rpg nerfs

Then tanks too strong

[west oxide]

True. Most AT equipment is in a good spot, except for tandems which IMO are too strong against APCs

[gritty pike]

Then you just keep nerfing and buffing

Better to just decide where you want vehicles to be and do one change

[west oxide]

I don't really think tandems needed to be capable of one shotting those, especially since the angle you can actually hit the weakpoint is more like a 270 degree arc instead of a 90 degree arc

[agile plume]

If BF4 vehicles are obnoxious for you then man, idk what to say

They are challenging yes, but they should be

Def not obnoxious

[west oxide]

it wasn't fun

[agile plume]

So avoid conquest

[west oxide]

Vehicles being obnoxious to fight against has been a complaint about battlefield games consistently and there's absolutely zero reason to do what they did as a result

[agile plume]

Simplest solutions, eliminate what's unfun, stick to what's fun

[agile plume]

True, but those are complains of minority

[west oxide]

You can't tell me all that footage of jets going 160-0 completely unopposed indicates healthy balance

[agile plume]

Many times I have seen reddit threads like 'Vehicles OP' in which majority of comments disagreed with OP

[west oxide]

Clearly oki and them disagree since little birds got slapped with the might of Zeus for that crime

as they should have

[distant hawk]

the LB was... special

[jagged shard]

rip little bird

went from needing skill to needing a lot of skill

[agile plume]

Are those 160 kills in jets (which I doubt, attack jet WR is around 104) consistent? Can you replicate that in every gane you play? Does every lobby has one guy going 100+/0 or is that rather rare and more likely top 1%?

[agile plume]

Littlebird shouldn't have been nerfed. Now it's a joke and it sucks. It lacked COUNTERPLAY, and that should have been added

[gritty pike]

Yeah based on how vehicles work in this game and how they dont want attack helis with missiles thats my conclusion as well. They dont really want the battlefield power level vehicles

[agile plume]

Like, proper AA options

[west oxide]

Being in a vehicle shouldn't really be an automatic I win button against a lone infantry, otherwise it's just not fun because the vehicle can always choose it's engagements. You can say it's healthy to need teamwork to take them out but that never seemed to be the consensus of the playerbase for battlefield, who consistently found vehicles to be a massive nuisance

[jagged shard]

ok it doesnt suck but its magnitudes weaker

[agile plume]

So we are stauck with not fan and underwhelming expirience, even comparing to PS2

[west oxide]

I make an exception versus medics because medics shouldn't be away from their team at all

[agile plume]

And it isn't automatic win. You are not going to carry whole team and you will not go 100+ first time in

Probably not even 10 or 50 game

[west oxide]

if the vehicle needs teamwork to kill then yes, it is an automatic I win button against a lone ifnantry

[agile plume]

You need to be good and have experience to do so

[west oxide]

That kind of follows does it not

[agile plume]

Against a lone infantry, even recon or other guy with a flank is auto win

[west oxide]

that's what made bf4 vehicles annoying - they often showed up when you were out alone and you couldn't fight them off effectively because they had so much awareness and so much capability

Battle bits masterclass for ground vehicles was not giving them third person

[agile plume]

Then don't be alone, follow your squad

[west oxide]

That was SUCH a good idea

[gritty pike]

Teamwork isnt a viable arguement here. Unless you are going in premade or you are playing on ridiculous choke point maps teamwork is minimal in most fps titles

[agile plume]

Don't expect a one guy to take on a tank

[west oxide]

Or you could just balance tanks to be more disposable and resolve both issues

Tankers can play ballsy because they won't lose much and infies have a chance to outplay them

[agile plume]

You don't need to work as a team, just follow others to not be alone

[agile plume]

That's not solves issues, that's a band aid that masks fundamental lacks in game experience

[west oxide]

Battle it very obviously wants tanks to be disposable with the low ammo count and relatively low health pool

[gritty pike]

Following others doesnt help you survive. It just makes you an easier target when people dont work together

[agile plume]

Then why they have 6 minutes cooldown

[west oxide]

Because they haven't committed completely yet and I do think that's a mistake

[agile plume]

Well then, teamwork bad, following others bad. What's good then?

[west oxide]

They really should have a much shorter respawn

[agile plume]

I disagree on that

Vehicles gameplay sucks

From bad physics, through lack of depth, to bad balance

Decreasing respawns does not fix that

[west oxide]

I think vehicles gameplay is great, except for APCs being very sluggish over rough terrain and somewhat lacking logistical autonomy

[agile plume]

Even WW3 does it better. BBR can do better, BBR deserves better

[agile plume]

Rare opinion tho, exept apc part

[gritty pike]

Making calls yourself. Both in bf and battlebit following others makes you easier to kill if the squad isnt premade.

[west oxide]

like, you can just accept that the way it's done isn't for you; I think that but for some adjustments vehicles are in a very good and fun spot where every fight I'd a thrill

infantry are scary to you, but you're also scary to infantry

Every clash is a desperate scramble

At least when you're playing forward like I do, obviously spawn tankers don't really have that experience

[agile plume]

I see your point, then don't expect soloing tanks in BF, and don't complain when you get killed by a tank

[jagged shard]

humvees ditched instantly
atvs ditched instantly
bh having garbage infantry damage
littlebird having no counters
apc being dogshit
tank gameplay consists of staying in the back of the map
jetskis are fine they do what they do
rhib is a joke lets face it
and same with the rcb, its a weaker lav thats bound to water

flaws i can point out

[agile plume]

You didn't miss much

Tho I think RHIB does it job too

[jagged shard]

the miniguns are a joke...

[west oxide]

RCB is a joke, yeah, especially since it takes damage from LBs which APCs dont

[agile plume]

They are also a gimmick

[jagged shard]

they dont do damage half the time... only thing they do is lay down "suppressive" fire

[agile plume]

BH miniguns tho...

That's a joke

[jagged shard]

straight up NEEDS a buff.

[west oxide]

Gunvees are unbelievably underrated though, people do not respect them and that makes them incredibly dangerous

[jagged shard]

they are GREAT against littlebirds or other hawks but oh boy

[agile plume]

Can't disagree, will agree

[jagged shard]

infantry is so shit

[west oxide]

some of my longest killstreaks were in gunvees

[jagged shard]

one 7mm sitting in a crowd of people is one fun way to get a bunch of kills

[agile plume]

Well, you are fucked only if you find yourself in thier LOS, other than that killing player inside or blowing it up is very easy

[gritty pike]

I have solo'ed tanks in both games. I dont really complain when killed by them

[agile plume]

They are underrated, but also kind of underwhelming.
To easy to kill driver/gunner, especially on M2 one. Laughable small amount of ammo,
Lack of windowns (they were showns in dev casts 5 months ago)

[gritty pike]

Im just saying teamwork as a counter to tanks isnt a valid arguement when someone isnt going for premade

[agile plume]

Good for you honestly

[gritty pike]

90% of the times i play fps games i dont go for premades. I just jump in and have fun. And im pretty sure im not the only one

[agile plume]

Less of a teamwork teamwork, more of a 'one guy can't solo, three guys spamming randomly RPG'S will have easy time' .
My point is, with 127 enemies, one shouldn't be as big of a threat as it is now

Just like PS2

It literally works there

[gritty pike]

Just add more tanks per map

Your problem will get fixed easily

[jagged shard]

thats.... not a good idea

[agile plume]

That's true, yet people often expect vehicles to only be payed with premades, and use that for a argument...

[agile plume]

That's very bad idea

Valley has 2 per team on 64v64, and that's enough

Even one would be alright

[agile plume]

Will it improve overall expireence? Will it add depth? Will it stop players soloing tanks?

[gritty pike]

You have 127 players per team and you give them 1 tank. Ofcourse infantry is going to be chilling all around the map. Vehicles is how you break infantry running around freely

And we have only tanks that really stop them. We dont have attack helis or jets and maybe humvees. But humvees are very situational and usually go down easily

[agile plume]

Will it fix physics?

No, it won't solve the problem

[gritty pike]

Physics? What do you want fixed with physics that is related to tanks?

Speed?

[agile plume]

No, physics, how they behave in contact with envirement

You know, quads pushing tanks off the bridge, tanks driving over jeeps, them feeling like hovercraft

Overall vehicles physics

It needs fixing

[acoustic lagoon]

Based

[jagged shard]

littlebird doesnt fly right

[agile plume]

Your 'problem will get fixed easily ' won't adress that

[gritty pike]

Quads can push tanks off bridges? Thats hillarious

They should definitely fix that

[agile plume]

That's reality

[gritty pike]

But thats an easy fix for them

[acoustic lagoon]

Yeah everything has like the same mass in collisions

[agile plume]

It's just glorified no clip

[jagged shard]

thing falls like a rock when upside down

[agile plume]

There were few attempts alredy...

[jagged shard]

its less exploitable than before but still

[gritty pike]

Well i agree with you that they should fix that issue. Sounds like a pretty straight forward thing to fix but i dont have any idea about how they made their game so maybe its harder than it should be for them

[agile plume]

It unfortunately is

[acoustic lagoon]

Yep

[west oxide]

on the other hand the M2 is incredibly accurate and very lethal, more than a fair trade and honestly it's been fairly rare for me to get sniped out of one

2 shot kill out to like 300m is just brutal

I have way more kills on the M2 gunvee than the 7M gunvee, that might just be me

And honestly when I think of a gunvee as heavy infantry even getting 3-5 kills and getting sniped is more than good enough in my book

That's a decent life

And they're very easy to get so it's not a huge loss if it goes down

[agile plume]

Honestly kills at 300m with M2 are like hard. With 7m, yeah, but M2 have a lot of drop off aka gravity, and barely any zoom

[west oxide]

They're just fun

[agile plume]

That's why there are one of the better made vehicles rn

Rest is worse

[west oxide]

yeah which is why I advocate for the others to become easier to get too lol

[agile plume]

PWC and Quads are perfect tho

[agile plume]

1. But that a band aid solution
2. It's a dead corner
   It's better to buff/balance/nerf what's needed to achive better expireence than simply making them more prominent, but keeping underlying gameplay loop weak and underwhelming

[west oxide]

…I don't get you at all lol

[agile plume]

Why shouldn't they have better gameplay

[west oxide]

Humvees are good because they're easy to get and provide good supporting fire... but suddenly that's band aid shoddy game design to extend that philosophy to tanks and APCs? That doesn't make sense at all

[west oxide]

Because most suggestions to make "better gameplay" for tankers just makes everyone else's gameplay against them infinitely worse

[agile plume]

One of the better vehicles doesn't mean good

[west oxide]

More health or worse AT weapons = camping is even more powerful

[agile plume]

They are one of the betters, not exactly exemplary of perfect gameplay

[west oxide]

and even if they don't they still become a persistent nuisance

[agile plume]

Then nerf camping, but provide alternative

[west oxide]

You can't

[agile plume]

Incentives aggresive gameplay, reduce zoom and velocity

[west oxide]

Any way to make vehicles more able to break through lines solo will make them even better at camping

[agile plume]

Make them unable to shoot from spawn IF they CAN play aggressively

[west oxide]

ah yes, the AV squad at spawn would love that

[jagged shard]

there is one spot in bbrtmk that allows you to shoot out of spawn while being repaired and resupplied by the box

[west oxide]

Treating vehicles as the disposable, somewhat weak assets they are solves all their problems by minimizing the detriment of wasting them and lessening the mental image of tanks as precious and scarce entities

people will be more willing to risk them since they're not throwing by doing so

[agile plume]

I definitely want to see that, that should happen

Did you reported that in map feedback?

[west oxide]

and thus aggressive play becomes less of a hurdle to cross for new tankers

cause it absolutely can be done even with tanks in their current state, it's just a lot harder

[agile plume]

But they will still die quickly when played aggressively, they will stilm not achive much, but death isn't as punishing rn

[jagged shard]

No, it’s so niche it doesn’t matter

[west oxide]

And what exactly is wrong with that

[agile plume]

Gameplay still is borning

[agile plume]

They are power multipliers they should be able to impact the game, in a way

[west oxide]

what wouldn't be boring

Explain what you think tanks should actually, specifically do

No game design buzzwords

Specific actions

[agile plume]

Driving into the city, getting clubbed in 2 minutes with 5 kills isn't peak gameplay

I can go 5-0 as inf while being medicore as fuck

[jagged shard]

drive shoot kill hold down spots not camp

[west oxide]

What's the difference between holding down a position and camping

[west oxide]

That's not actions they should do, it's actions they shouldn't

I want solutions

I want you to tell me exactly what i, John tanker, should do with my tank in your ideal BBR game

[agile plume]

Drive to the point. Kill enemy armour, kill enemy vehicles, kill enemy, help team push stalemates, help team cap points, any points, even inside Frugis (vehicles are on Frugis, so devs intend for them to be used on such maps). If low health, disengage. Repeat when needed

[west oxide]

Where on the point

[agile plume]

But now if you get close to a point, you are getting swarmed

[west oxide]

Directly on it? Just outside it?

200m away?

[agile plume]

As close as needed or/and beneficial

If you can, sit in the middle

[west oxide]

so they should be able to just park anywhere regardless of enemy numbers

[jagged shard]

ones on a point the other is anywhere

[agile plume]

No

[west oxide]

well then they will literally never be able to do the job you ask of them

Particularly on urban maps

If they can't deal with the attention of 50-60 people then they simply cannot contest points

[agile plume]

They should be able and incetivised to play morw aggressively. If that means entering cap radiosu, they should be able to do so.
Alone against few enemy squads? No.
But now they struggle doing so when surrounded be team zerg, because one guy with funny bricks can ohk them

[agile plume]

That's true, to a point

You could play tanks well on Sidge of sanghai tho

Curious how that was achived

[west oxide]

You seem to be under the impression that tankers exist either ahead of the friendly deathball getting c4'd constantly or behind the spawn wall

And never anywhere else

Is sitting 200-300m outside the point and blowing out walls and defensive positions not aggressive enough for you

Hell, what about 100m outside the point

Is that not aggressive enough

Cause I ans any other competent tanker can do that now, with tanks just as they are - it's a risk to do so, but I can do it

so is aggressive only actually sitting in the point for you

[jagged shard]

They don’t do that
They want guaranteed kills not “oh I helped destroy that wall”

[agile plume]

Well, we are talking about C4 interactions with vehicles, and how that forces passive gameplay. And we are talking about promoting aggresive gameplay. Of course I will not speak about RTB or crusing maps in search of the flanks. It happens, but its not on the topic right now

[west oxide]

The problem I'm trying to point at is this

You want tanks to be able to sit in the thick of it

The problem is that to do that, you have to make them extremely capable

[agile plume]

I am okay with that, as a part of capability, not only thing they can do. Tho i know some people don't like even that

[agile plume]

Be able to do so, definitely more than now.

[west oxide]

And when you make something extremely capable, it's much worse to fight against even in its intended role and it makes conservative play even more powerful

[agile plume]

So it's beter to have them underwhelming and not contributing to PTFO, and it's better to punish more aggresive behaviour, keeping tanks in passive/defensive gameplay?

[west oxide]

If a tank is hard to kill when it's sitting directly on the point, inside a literal killbox, it will be invincible when set up on a real position that any sane tanker now would take

[agile plume]

That's what I am gettig from yoy

[agile plume]

So make them not able to tank dozens of RPG'S inside the point

[west oxide]

I'm saying that encouraging aggressive tank play by buffing the vehicles or significantly curtailing anti vehicle capabilities will have severe adverse consequences that will benefit nobody

[agile plume]

Make them able to contribute more than now. Make them able to drive 50m from the point and support the team. Those things aren't really possible right now, any building is a death threat.

[west oxide]

It will only make conservative players even more powerful while forcing the entire infantry component (ostensibly, the other 125 players on the enemy team) to now contend with constant pressure from obnoxious death machines most of them have no real counter to

[agile plume]

Then what's your alternative? What's your idea at imprving gameplay and incentivising behaviour other tha disliked "camping in spawn"?

[west oxide]

Shorter respawn times and better mobility. Make vehicles relatively easy to get, and make map traversal and repositioning less of a chore

[agile plume]

And you fail at doing what you achive

[west oxide]

Except gunvees show that it would work

People use gunvees exactly like you want them to

They push them up close and try and cap points with them

Does it always go well for them? Nope. But they do it

Because they can, and they don't lose much for doing so

[agile plume]

You taking away reward for killing them. You are diluting reward for being good enough to survive as long as you can. You are not improving them, not adding depth to the gameplay, you just spam them more expecting it will shut up people that aren't happy about current way they are

[west oxide]

right now tanks and APCs can have significant effect, but they're so scarce and sluggish that they spend most of the game out of action. Reducing that via shorter respawn timers and better movement means they'll spend more time in the action over a game

[agile plume]

We need high value assets, so their presence is felt, thier lose is felt

If you want 5 min power ups, add MRAPS

[west oxide]

Okay but turn that logic around

[agile plume]

As glorified gunvies

[west oxide]

You're on a team capturing a point

You're with 30 of your buddies having a slugfest

Uh oh

A tank appears

In your case, pretty much everyone is gonna need to drop what they're doing and contend with that tank since it will be very dangerous

That's annoying.

Nobody wants to deal with that.

When vehicles are super powerful, everything stops for the enemy team. They have to drop what they're doing and blow it up now before it ruins everything

You are 1 to 3 people in your vehicle, immediately compromising the game of 30+ people with nothing more than your presence. That's shit

[agile plume]

They do not have 'significant' effect. Not once I have seen or felt that playing as inf. Removing vehicles wouldn't change much about how conq game palys out. They can have effect, yes. Just as well as 1kpm medic main, or average sniper, or Desmond Doss roleplayer. They are not as impactfull as you are trying to paint them

[west oxide]

Infantry hate that shit, and like it or not infantry are most of any given game, even on CQ

high effect vehicles inherently compromise infantry gameplay heavily

You're hurting 120 people for the benefit of 8

It's not a good trade

Nobody fuckin likes it

Do you not remember how much vitriol built up around Little Birds back in the day? Now figure that in for every single vehicle driver period

[west oxide]

I've personally broken many many defensive lines using vehicles played, for my standards, quite aggressively, so I'm speaking from a tankers experience here. Aggressive tanking can rip apart enemy concentrations and it can do it with devastating efficiency

People don't try it because it's hard

You have to be extremely vigilant and choose your spots well

But it can be done, but people are scared to experiment because usually if you lose a tank in a game you're unlikely to catch it's next respawn so that's basically your tank game over for the day

[agile plume]

But infantry isn't only part of your playerbase. We have pilots and tankers. Those players also deserve fun and good gameplay im ways they enjoy the most. And you CAN give them, while keeping everything balanced.
Buffing vehicles doesn't mean automaticly everyone else is hurt by that. It can end like that, if you go overboard. You are creating a narration in which every buff to AFV's other than your proposition is destroying game for everyone else. And that's not true. You can buff them, make them better and still make ot fair and enjoyable for others. Planetside 2 does that. If you don't like BF4 approach( in which you seem to be minority up to this point), maybe BF5 will be ok?
There are ways of doing that. It doesn't automatic means that inf gameplay becomes unplayable

[west oxide]

I'm saying that your expectations of what vehicles should do are unrealistic and meeting them absolutely would be detrimental to infantry gameplay

Any vehicle dangerous enough to rush right into the killbox and have serious impact is going to be an utter nightmare when it's in a situation of advantage

If it can take on 10, then 1 has no chance

That's just the reality of it

[agile plume]

Through our whole todays discussion you are opposing buffs with the pretext 'I found that obnoxious and annoying'
BF4 is GOAT game in genre for a reason. It did a lot of things right, AFV's included

[west oxide]

BF4 is not flawless and it's vehicle balance is one of its biggest

[agile plume]

A lot of people yearn for that experience again

[agile plume]

A lot of people will disagree

[west oxide]

then they're wrong

[agile plume]

Some may agree

[agile plume]

Your opinion

[west oxide]

fact is, BF4 is a niche game now. BBR does not and should not aim to clone it

[agile plume]

If you go overboard, yes. There is middle ground. There is golden point

[gritty pike]

Bf4 vehicle balance wasnt bad tbh

[west oxide]

And I'd argue that any point where a tank can directly capture a control point is way too far

[agile plume]

And what if it can take on 2 or 3 , not 10 ?

[gritty pike]

Its just a different way of vehicles working on an open map

[west oxide]

Then it won't be able to capture points

[agile plume]

Only bad thing were air vehicles, but they are out of the scope of this thread

[west oxide]

Vehicles now can fairly easily take on 2 or 3

[agile plume]

Then it won't.

[gritty pike]

Everything was good imo

[west oxide]

With the sole exception of 2 or 3 engineers focusing direct attention

[agile plume]

But will it be better than now? Yes.

[west oxide]

Which frankly, if you're in that situation you deserve what you get

[agile plume]

Will it be able to paly more aggressively? Yes.

[gritty pike]

I was mostly playing infantry and didnt have a huge issue in bf4. You just learn to hide when hearing choppers

[agile plume]

Will there be less incentive to camp? Yes.

[west oxide]

and it will make infantry miserable everywhere it goes, especially recons and wide flankers who especially in these dark times where spawning is utterly fucked are more important than ever

[west oxide]

So you're willing to directly compromise what you think vehicles should do, yes?

If you think their role is to directly push points and absorb fires, you shouldn't accept my argument

Because my argument says that vehicles will never, ever do what you want

[agile plume]

@west oxide when I am saying
'Able to play more aggressively, not soloed by one person' your mind instantly jumps to some boogy man version on a tank taking hordes of players like mobs in some WoW dungeon.
Like why? Who harmed you?
Buffs to vehicles shouldn't end up in what you think they will.
Vehicles need to be able to play more aggressively then they can now. They should be more resiliant than now. They should have more depth and give more fun. Not taking whole engi squads by themselves. Just be better.

[gritty pike]

Keep in mind that bringing tanks on the power level of bf4 tanks will not stop c4ing or rpgs in urban areas. Those were very valid even in that game

[west oxide]

Personally I found that as someone who played engi in BF4 I was never anything more than a nuisance to enemy vehicles

[gritty pike]

Going to cap a point on a tank wad always a risk

[west oxide]

I could RPG anything I wanted to, but I only ever seemed to just piss them off rather than make them leave

Vehicles didn't ever have to fear me

And worse, they knew where I was just as good as I knew where they were

Between third person and driver thermals

they were annoyingly persistent and you couldn't get them to buzz off without significant help from usually uncommunicative teammates

[agile plume]

And it was good and balanced there. InBBR it isn't. Too many players, too many threats. Vehicles have survivability tuned for 32vs32, not 127vs127. Even after buffs they should die to C4 and RPG's. Just not as common as rn. Add enemy vehicles to the equation, they should die more to them that they do rn. But @west oxide thinks I want them to tank everything like some boss in MMO

[west oxide]

In BBR vehicles fear engis. They either have to prioritize them or they gotta scram when the rockets start flying. I find it fucking thrilling when I come under attack. Honestly, the loss of the cat and mouse game is the biggest reason why I hate that tandems can one shot APCs

But infantry fear vehicles too, if they notice them

[agile plume]

Yes, and it should be a risk. But it also should be possible, and feasible, but it's not RN.
That's all fair.

[gritty pike]

I thought you didnt want one player to blow up tanks. That was a thing in bf4

[west oxide]

So everyone is on edge. It can go either way. That's the shit. That's good balance.

I live for those wires edge escapes when I came under engineer attack and lived

I can sudbisist off the adrenaline high of warding off a C4 attempt all the way back to base

[agile plume]

Not as often as they do right now. I am not stupid nor biased. If conditions are met, you should blow tank up alone. But now it just happes too often. You don't see every second or third vehicle die to C4 in BF or PS2

[gritty pike]

I was blowing up lots of tanks with c4 in BF4

Was mostly playing flanker and tanks that were capping flags were easy pray

[agile plume]

But like, 2 or 3 every game? Like you can do easily in BBR

[gritty pike]

Sure. If the tank parks on the flag

Those are the easiest tank kills

[agile plume]

If it parks on the flag then that's stupid tank. But now even smart tank can't get tok close, because that sure death

[agile plume]

In BBR vehicles fear everyone, because everyone has C4

[stark axle]

even in south america teamplay is horrible most of the time

you do tend to find teamplayers in helicopters

[west oxide]

How else is a tank supposed to directly contest a point on 127v? Capture slapfights have 40-50 people per team regularly involved. Average 10-12 engis if we assume class distribution is equal. If it can't survive that, it can't so what you specifically said tanks should be able to do

[agile plume]

Teamplay is bad in everyone region. Some regions have better communication than others. Like NA vs EU for example

How the comms look in SA?

[west oxide]

Only if you're within running distance of them. I find recons out on the flanks that I have zero concern over because I know they have no chance. Happens all the time

[stark axle]

shitpost

mostly

teamplay is more on vehicles but low chance still

found a spanish guy and even though we could communicate to some degree, we still got wrecked

[west oxide]

hell, even when I come across big enemy groups I often find most of them don't seem to be aware of me and those that do might usually be medics or supports that can't possibly do anything about me

[stark axle]

just too many ´players for a 2 man team

[agile plume]

How? Being tuned for the amount of players it faces, not only 1/4 of them. Simple start.
And before you star staying 'that's OP, that's obnoxious, you can't solo anymore' that's literally what PS2 does, and vehicles aren't a problem there

[stark axle]

couldnt vehicles health scale for size?

like 500 in 32
1k in 127

tanks i mean

[agile plume]

That would be literally perfect solution, idk if possible

[west oxide]

God no it wouldn't!

[stark axle]

because stuff like choppers have a easier time since they only have to worry about like other helis and gun fire

fly close to the ground and that changes a shit ton

[west oxide]

If you even double vehicle health then you really cannot hope to fight a tank without your entire squad backing you up

[stark axle]

i mean it is a good solution if not to change infantry gadgets

could even explain giving recon c4 since everything takes longer to kill

[west oxide]

Raising tank health only makes conservative play even stronger by making RPGs less of a threat

[jagged shard]

yall still yapping in here god damn

[stark axle]

you coulld make other aproach and buff armour values from the front

actually punish bad position and shit

[stark axle]

yes

im a yapper

[west oxide]

if you can tank 20 RPGs frontally there literally is no reason to push up where you could potentially get side- or back-shot to death

You'll just park up and be an invincible bunker

[jagged shard]

i am THE #4 yapper.

[west oxide]

More health = buffing campers

[agile plume]

I am starting to think that everything that buffs vehicles in different way that you imagined it is the second worst thing in the world, right after reisins in cheescake.
Like man, let's be realistic here. They are game that do vehicles better than BBR, we can learn form them. It works there, it will work here. You just need to accept, that resonably buffing vehicles won't make them super ultra unstopable death machines that are immune to everything and you need to sacrifice virgins in order to make them bleed. There are ways to make them better, and still balances.

[jagged shard]

raisin*

[west oxide]

Yes, there are, and none of those ways involve buffing their health

That's like, the one thing that absolutely should not happen

[jagged shard]

oki needs to man up and admit that hes been shadownerfing littlebird hp

and he needs to give it back to us

[west oxide]

You seem equally unaccepting to the concept that maybe vehicles actually are playable and are being held back mostly by the philosophy only being half implemented

[agile plume]

Lesa zoom=nerf camper
Less long LoS=ner camper
Less velocity=nerf camper
More incentive and more reward for thing other than camping=less campers
Your concerns are valid, but you are overblowing them

[west oxide]

The spawn rules imply vehicles are highly precious and can't be wasted, but their health and ammo reserves imply they're disposable and should be used aggressively and then lost

[stark axle]

and you wait a shit ton to use them again

[agile plume]

Your idea do not improve the gameplay, just masks the foul odour it has.

[stark axle]

honestly talking about that part f ammor reserve

that could be changed

why not just outright remove the 2 ammo type

just make one that is jack of all trade kinda of deal

ok in tank fights and crow control

that could help in the state they are in right now

somthing alon those lines of deadly but scarce

[agile plume]

They are playable, if you put enough time in them. They are not fun for average palyer. They have too high skill floor. You can make them work, but that's requires too much from you to wresle with bad design.
And even if you make them work, you still see they are worse than any other alternative.

Anyway @west oxide how much do you play vehicles in this game?

[west oxide]

Less zoom = vehicles have even worse situational awareness than usual and can't identify targets (you even complained about this with the M2 gunvee so don't act like it wouldn't cause issues)
Less long LoS = a fuckton of work for kot
Less velocity = basically nothing, actually, since most vehicles either already have pitiful velocity (APCs) or a wide blast radius that makes accuracy less a problem (tanks)
More incentive for things other than camping = a non solution that actually doesn't fix anything since it doesn't suggest any real changes, as if there's any specific rewards for camping in a tank that need to be removed

[agile plume]

Quantifiable answear please

[jagged shard]

less zoom is the opposite of what you said

you see more

identify targets sure

but see more = generally situational awareness

hence why snipers are dumb asf

and lack all of it

[agile plume]

Less zoom, from x 8 to x5, its really enough for most ranges. And it doesn't nerf x1 averness

[west oxide]

I don't have an hours count but I have about 1700 kills between both APCs, about 300 kills between both tanks, and 900-1000 kills between all gunvee variants

[agile plume]

You can alredy see shorter LoS in the more recent maps, like new Basra,Kodiak, Outskirts, district, new Multu

[agile plume]

10k kills on BTR alone

[west oxide]

Kodiak literally has the worst tank spawn camping this side of sandysunset lmao

[agile plume]

Tho that's the biggest amount I have lol

[west oxide]

I literally always see tanks parked outside E

[agile plume]

Noo. Valley, Wine Paradise are much worse

[west oxide]

And district is the opposite extreme where vehicles are so blind that they basically never make it long anywhere

[jagged shard]

i like district because it gives me an "advantage"
i can see them they cant see me

[west oxide]

At least wineparadise tank campers have to go to A or F to start lobbing at their enemies

[agile plume]

Imagine if you could see a tank near C, a tank that isn't a wreck.
Just imagine

[jagged shard]

dont get me started on wine
that map got turned into a shit one fast

[west oxide]

meanwhile Kodiak tank campers get a perfect little cliff that protects them from RPGs from all angles and a nice and nearby resupply box for their convenience

[agile plume]

A tank that can actively push with the team, not worrying as mucb that it evaporates instantly

[west oxide]

All whole being right next to E point so they can have a real gamer moment

[agile plume]

Which side and game size

[west oxide]

127v conquest

Maybe E isn't the exact point but it's that sides gimme

The weastern side

[agile plume]

Which side? RU, USA?

[west oxide]

I can't remember off the top of my head, I just know that it's the left side on the map overview

[west oxide]

Gotta commend you, that's impressive

[agile plume]

I didn't get my gold skin tho😭

[west oxide]

But now I really don't get how you don't see what I mean. Surely you've gotten many of those kills by pushing up around enemy lines?

[jagged shard]

i dont get a gold skin for my 17k on littlebird

[west oxide]

When the enemy team isn't all looking you surely know that you're not totally paper

Nobody gets 10,000 kills without understanding their limits

You've undoubtedly had countless incidents where you scraped by a C4 attack, or fought off an AV squad all by yourself, and seen firsthand that were people given permission to you absolutely could be ballsy and come out ahead?

I've had many, and I barely have a twentieth the experience you do

[jagged shard]

whats this "apc" you talk about 🚎

[west oxide]

Sometimes you genuinely gave me the impression that you weren't at all familiar with what they can or can't do because so often you say things that run directly contradictory to my own experience

I push up and flank all the time

And most of the time, I don't die instantly to the first person I see

[jagged shard]

i could maybe learn how to use an apc but i dont like the shitty movement

[west oxide]

Most of the time, if I die at all, i die either to tandem cheese, or to 4 or 5 engis focusing e

Situations I would expect to die in no matter what

Maybe I just have a different perspective. I'm usually thinking relative to what I might have done as an infantry

I know my limits there, for sure.

As an infantry, I might have killed one guy in that little recon huddle pile before his friends turned on me and mowed me down

In the APC though? Piece of cake. Never worried

This isn't familiar to you?

I get out of many situations that I wouldn't have as infantry when I'm in my dumb little battle bus - is it so bad that there are some situations even it can't escape?

[west oxide]

Funny, I came here mainly to suggest that that exact thing be adjusted lol

They're definitely too slow. It's really not fun

[agile plume]

Oh yeah, vehicles mobility needs work, definitely. Speeds, accelerations, torque, and steering

[agile plume]

I think of myslef as a person that knows how to play with vehicles, I do have experience with that. I do have results to prove that.
I also have ability to do logical thinking, and to compare. And when I see players, 6 months in after game released, notoriously getting stomped by single infantry man, I know that's not what should have happened. When I see people sitting in spawn zone, or keeping excesive distance, playing passively or defensively, I know something wrong, but I understand why they are doing it.
I also know how other games, some very acclaimed, and enjoed by a lot of people do what we do. And they do things differently.
I do know my limits, most of my deaths, are from borderline OP tandems or definitely OP c4, due to my overconfidence or situations form no one could recover. Those things happens.
But I also know when and how I have fun. And that I have fun, even more fun, on both sides, in games that have stronger more competent vehicles.
I play very aggressively for the standards of this game. I push bridges on waki, I do thunder runs and flanks on Kodiak, I know how to work with good LoS on Eduardovo.
We probably have simmilar expireence in the game , we just don't know it.
But what is different is that your perspective takes your expireence for granted, overlokking or ignoring bare state of things and others.
You and I may be able to push, and play aggressively. Average palyer will not be able. He will die enough times to learn to camp.
That's borders on gatekeeping usefull behaviours behind a lot of skill and dedication. And that's bad.
You see, all my talking about making vehicles able to play aggressively is to push the game in that direction, with reason, for everyone. Some wilm be better at that, some will be worse, but the game will be better over all.

That's a wall of text

[jagged shard]

😭

[agile plume]

And before someone starts thinking that I am 100% selfless filantropic BBR messiah, I woudl benefit on such changes, so would players that like to have fun with vehicles, and those that hate spawn campers

[jagged shard]

praise be bbr messiah

[magic latch]

pretty sure vehicles can spawn camp also especially any helis

[jagged shard]

Camp at spawn or spawn camp enemy team

[magic latch]

I mean bf4 had pretty strong helis and they would blow up opposing helis right as they left spawn lmao

[agile plume]

We call that bad game design

[sour igloo]

i agree. a single infantry soldier with AT equipment being on the same grounds as a tank makes tanks mainly there for show and spectacle. in a game with a massive player count, its a flawed balance when one anti-tank soldier can hard-counter a single tank. sure - it should be possible, but not without extreme difficulty and skill. it should be teamwork that makes it naturally easier.

[jagged shard]

Only map that I can think of that practically can achieve this is Salhan

[magic latch]

I mean you could also blow up vehciles with c4 but you would get blown to bits trying to get close

how many players with c4 get shredded trying to approach tank

[jagged shard]

But even then there’s a large safe zone and it’s like 10 seconds of fire to kill

exaggeration but ykwim

[magic latch]

giving power to a single player is fine

makes it feel like you acctually did something

[agile plume]

Not that much really. Definitely a lot of vehicles die to C4, but like a lot. And then life of one inf guy costs him, like, 5sec in respawn menu, when tank needs 6 minutes. Definitely worth to try, even if you die

[sour igloo]

except apparently when they drive a tank.

[agile plume]

No when we have 254 players. Things scale. One players is strong. 4 is very strong. What about 8? Or 16? That's just fraction of team size.

[agile plume]

True that

[magic latch]

well how did one player get close enough to the tank then

you have all your team around you

[agile plume]

Just by running

It's not hard to see vehicles get blown up

But they die so quickly you may miss it

[magic latch]

maybe position better then

[agile plume]

Where? Only safe position is spawn zone

[agile plume]

Anyways, how much do you play vehicles?

[magic latch]

also bf4 spawn timers for vehicles is like 60-90 seconds

[jagged shard]

and bbr doesn’t

[agile plume]

We have 6 minutes for a tank

[magic latch]

lmao

[agile plume]

4 for apc

They do not reflect thier worth

[west oxide]

with the exception of APCs which are critically weak to backshots, average tanks need 3-10 HEAT hits to kill (3 in the best case scenario where all are on the rear and 10 in the worst where only the frontal aspect is visible)

honestly, any tank that dies to that deserved it lol

Being immune to gunfire and being able to survive multiple RPG hits, imo, means that you're always at an advantage versus a single enemy engineer

catch them without their RPG out, they're boned; if they're from your front, you get lower damage and can anticipate the attacks and dodge them

if they caught you side or rear then they outplayed you

but chances are you'll be able to limp home if you play your cards right

[ember valve]

So you are for or against tank buffs?

[west oxide]

For

I think they need a bit more ammo reserves (particularly tanks, I wouldn't mind a refactored split of like 10/18 if the 28 shell total must be respected but I think 18 of both would be great) , their respawn timers are ridiculously long and need to be shortened considerably (halved, at least, possibly more), and APCs need a lot more low end power so they can get out of their own way

[ember valve]

How does it work? If I'm driving a tank and survive longer than 6 minutes, does another tank spawn in or not because mine is still alive?

[west oxide]

Tanks don't respawn if both are alive

Once one dies, it's respawn timer activates

Then after that time it reappears

[ember valve]

Do BTRs / LaVs work the same way?

[west oxide]

All vehicles do

Most just have significantly shorter respawn timers than APCs and tanks

[ember valve]

I personally wouldn't be behind it since I like to play for longevity and think that surviving for longer periods of time should be rewarded.

I do think they should be able to have more low end power so you don't get your BTR stuck in a ridiculous place lol

[west oxide]

Well it is, playing conservatively is rewarded by you getting to stay in the tank

That said my respawn shortening half encourages aggressive play by lessening the impact of a lost tank while also making it so that newbies or very overbearing AV squads can't effectively deprive your team of tanks

[ember valve]

Still would hurt your overall team to play conservatively in that case though.

[west oxide]

it encourages you to take risks and go 60-3 while pushing with your team instead of 60-0 lobbing shells from spawn

Eh. Most spawn camping tanks at least defend their gimme point

[ember valve]

What's a gimme point?

[west oxide]

Which in this day and age is actually somewhat valuable since so many games end up total washes and that gimme might be all you got

The point closest to the team's spawn; so called because it's kind of there to be held by the nearby team

some maps though are so egregious that the spawncamping tanks don't even defend their gimme

I'm looking directly at sandysunset RU side here

[ember valve]

Ah we call that "defending supply lines" lol

Goodnight my friend.

[west oxide]

yeh

in general I think vehicles need more qol than they do more power

Making them easier to use and less punishing to lose

[agile plume]

I see that you decided to ignore existence of Tandem, convinient.
It drops down to 2 at worst 10 at best shots, BUT, given junkyness of frontal hitbox, you can't really expect to tank those 10 shots. Anything that striken from top, or upper part of front deals 'normal'dmg, ie, HEAT 20, Tandem 48, making it 5/3 shots respectively. And given the amount of verticality, its not hard to ignore frontal hitbox, even if by accident.
So, in practice, you can consistently expect to tank 5/6 shots before you burn or die. That's 40-50% less than the 'beat case'

[agile plume]

All that changes is forcing you to spawn more, and you RTB more.
And your idea basically ignores any other improvements that are needed because 'they respawn to fast, that would be OP'

Not to mention it decreases reward/punishment for loosing a tank. Your team managed to destroy a tank. Great! New one will be there i 3 to 4 minutes, not 6-8
Your team fucked up and lost a tank? Do not worry, next one will be delivered in 3-4 minutes!
Reducing timers just artificially inflate tank numbers, instead of improving them

Like, you want to buff tanks? Do it properly. Make them better, include community opinion, improving expirience of using it, move skill floor and ceeling lower,add depth and more importantly make them more fun. Not spam them more hoping it will fix the issue.

You are scared that more tanky tanks will be obnoxious while camping? More common tanks will achive the same effect, you destroyed a camper, he's right back at it, because he respawned faster.

If you are soo scared of campers, then make shure camping is not viable, that's not hard to achive

[sturdy nacelle]

The only reason vehicles feels useless it's because every class has access to C4, make it limited to assault and engineer and another song will be sung

If devs want us to use the destruction capabilities of every map they can do this, and add a explosive available for everyone in a extra slot that has the only purpouse of destroying walls, you can't throw it freely

[agile plume]

Well, true, to a point

Then there is problem of Tandems and APC being just paper

We have terrible sustainability, no passive HP regen, no self repair etc, so vehicles need to be somewhat tanky

[sturdy nacelle]

That's another solution if devs want

You're an engineer? Find cover and press e (random example) while inside and your vehicle will start repairing, but you're vulnerable, you can't move

[agile plume]

Straight up BF5, yeah, would work

[distant hawk]

I liked that from bf1, had to repair from inside to repair system, while the standard repair was just HP

[ember valve]

Agreed nearly 100%. Only difference is I think it should just be unavailable to medics and recon.

[stark axle]

support too for me atleast if we could get a gadget focused on destroying buildings

since support is the class that gets the most value on doing this

[agile plume]

The thing with C4 is, everyone should have destruction capability.
Not everyone should have AT or good anty inf

So breaching charge it is

[stark axle]

basically

it keeps that movement and flanking capability but tones the killing capability

[distant hawk]

use the model for c4 as a breaching charge(which is what its size would indicate, a c2 breaching charge at that) and just have a massive fucking block with less range for the damage

[west oxide]

Except in worst case scenarios, tandems are usually able to be actively evaded; granted, APCs obviously have a much worse time, but that’s why I advocate for making vehicles more mobile on top of more available

I wouldn’t object to field repairs either honestly, though. I do think you should have to have a repair tool in your inventory to do it though

Tandems are a weird case honestly because they’re rare

And their effectiveness decreases drastically with distance

So they’re basically ultra punishing in urban environments while being hardly an issue out in the wilds

[distant hawk]

the worst case scenario happens alot

[west oxide]

Honestly a good way to balance tandems would be to make it a flat damage: it gets no bonuses from weak spots but doesn’t get reduced by armor either (this solves the problems of tandems being really OP versus APCs while being kind of middling versus tanks)

[distant hawk]

or change the armor classes to actually mean something

tank and apc are in the same class, so tandem does a fuckton to apc because its balanced for tank

"balanced"

[west oxide]

You won’t find argument from me that tandem damage to APCs is extremely excessive

The fact that against tandems APCs become essentially equivalent to humvees is just brutal

But honestly I do genuinely find that tandems aren’t COMPLETELY impossible to fight: I’ve actively outmaneuvered incoming tandems that would have otherwise hit many times

In some situations tandems are actually strictly worse lol

Against waterborne vehicles tandems are far more likely to scrub in the water armor

[jagged shard]

Water is already cancer to line up shots

[west oxide]

(Another reason water armor is so powerful)

Eh, it’s just less forgiving

I’ve rarely had issue doing it personally but I’ve always had a weird affinity with RPGs in bf-likes so i could accept that im just different

I also run HEATs

In countering water armor the tier list is Tank AP > HEAT > Tandem