tank buffs

[opaque bluff]

explosive reactive armour, have a few patches where it isnt there and make the armour run out (because it explodes on heat) and only make tandem rpgs be able to go through era (intended purpose) i think there should be two types of tank, maybe 3, tank destroyers, mbts, and heavier mbts, so the t80 would be a heavy mbt, a tank destroyer would be a wheeled vehicle with a tank cannon on it in return for less armour, much less armour, and the mbt is just the t90, for america im thinking of the heavier mbt being the merkava since its quite strong, the tank destroyer being a striker, and the mbt is just the abrams.

maybe the era would only apply to the heavier mbts, but i think all the rpgs need a nerf apart from rpg frag.

maybe increase the spawn rate or amount of tanks per team as well.

[astral salmon]

guess some server admin finally understand that server with insta-vehicle-respawn and without salhan/azagor inside conquest will be filled up immediate

[opaque bluff]

this is the stryker. make it a high risk high reward vehicle

just a weaker apc but deadly towards tanks

[astral salmon]

apc is weaker than tank also with that movement inertia =///

[muted abyss]

That's literally glorified jeep. That would be terrible to play

It should be more survivabe than APC, if you want it to take on tanks.
Even IF APC woulf get buffed

[opaque bluff]

just make it fast, and have a better cannon in return for less armour

not as bad as a jeep

[muted abyss]

And M10 booker would be better

[muted abyss]

That's what 'weaker than APC means'

Apc takes 2 tandem 3 heat to kill

Jeep takes 1 tandem 2 heat

I like the idea of the Light tank/tank destroyer. But it should be tank sidegrade

[opaque bluff]

maybe same armour then but only sabot, like the same armour as an apc but no heat

so it cannot kill infantry well

i think this should be the tank destroyer for the russian side. 2s25 sprut

[muted abyss]

Yeah, definitely Sprut for RU

So sexy

[muted abyss]

That would be super obnoxious to play and would promote camping

So hyper obnoxious

A lobby is made of 254 players, 15 of them are in vehicles. The rest is inf. That would be boring and one sided gameplay

Everyone can spam you with rpg, but you are borderline defenceless

The idea is great. We need sidegrades, we need variety.

The proposed way of executing it needs more thought

[flat crater]

heavy tanks could be T-90M (using its paper stats) and M1A2 SEP Vwhocares

[flat crater]

or just make it low damage with HE too so flanks needed on tanks

or just APC armor with tank gun

[muted abyss]

Would be terrible. APC alredy sucks. Now you make it suck more giving it less flexibility (no autocannon)

It should be something between tank and LAV's.

Something like Lighting form Planetside 2

[flat crater]

a whole lot better for tank destroying

apc cannon is way inferior

could also give it a machine gun which APCs lack for some reason

[muted abyss]

Sure. Bigger alpha dmg is better against vehicles. But 98% of lobby is infantry that hates your existence. You need tools to fight majority of threats. And coax is definitely not enough.

[muted abyss]

So far I disagree. I am yet to get close to my LAV's PR with a tank.
APC cannon is much more flexible, allowing you to deal with targets in different circumstances in different ways esily. Speed and flexibility carried APC, and makes it berrable. It still sucks.
And yes, it lacks coax for some reason, even whem devs mentioned adding it.

[flat crater]

Read what i am saying

#1202589243721912391 message

[muted abyss]

Yes. I agreed with you. #1202589243721912391 message

But there is at beat 3 tanks to destroy. And you need to contest for those kills with inf, which simply outperforms you in that role.

[flat crater]

It was in the context of anti vehicle not overall performance

[muted abyss]

That's why Tank destroyer would be terrible idea in BBR.
Light tank on the other hand would work perfectly.

[muted abyss]

Sure. Anti tank role for vehicles is so limited in comparison to the whole scope of the game, that it could be negligible.
Honestly you could remove AT damage from tanks and APC'S and the difference would be insignificant in comparison to nerfing anti inf effectiveness. Which I find funny. Tanks suck in AT role.

[eternal forum]

If you are precisely enough to hit them in the weak spot

[eternal forum]

Tank vs Tanks needs to be buffed

[jagged ocean]

APC takes 1 tandem 2 HEAT on weakspot

[eternal forum]

How big is the weak spot?

Most of the time the people only do 87 in certain areas of the LAV

Other ones do less damage

[jagged ocean]

full side and rear

including splash damage hitting those spots

[eternal forum]

I think they need nerf the splash damage against vehicles, making direct hits the way of dealing full damage

[jagged ocean]

yep, yet another one on the list that is buggy AT solutions

[eternal forum]

Agree with that

[muted abyss]

Definitely doesn't require that much. Did you know that Heat and tandem have splash radious against vehicles? 4m and 2m respectively.