Tankbusting & You

[barren jay]

tldr: general vehicle survival improvement but vehicles are encouraged to retreat and repair instead of sitting around and eating hits until they die. repair points are placed regular intervals. antitank mine limit pentupled (5x).

[shadow pier]

.

[barren jay]

• ammo hits. these dont deal extra damage (magic blowout ammo rack) but they do destroy most of the reserve ammo. maybe like 1 reload left in reserve for the weapon.
• tank front armor massive buff except for tank ap hit

the main problem with balancing tandem is that its gimmick is ignoring reactive armor... which doesnt exist in this state of the game.

• c4 indirect nerf, more audible cues that it's being thrown onto stuff
• possibly removed hitmarkers on infantry for vehicles beyond a certain range, vehicles hitmarker fine still

[oblique steppe]

Ammo hits seems more like a poorly thought mechanic that is supposed to achive god knows what but only makes vehicle gameplay more obnoxious.

[oblique steppe]

Removing hit markera is fucked up idea and goes against core ideas of FPS games. You either have hit markers, or go full realism and there is no hit markets at all. Removing hit markers form anything, no matter vehicle, gadget, weapon, explosive or anything else, but keeping it one everything else is fucked up idea making use of such thing unnecessarily hard, unintuitive and not fun.

[oblique steppe]

C4 nerf? By making it more audible? LMAO. What else? "Nerfing" C4 by makeing it bright red?
That will change nothing.

If you want to nerf C4, which should have been done months ago, remove if from some clases, reduce it AT damage, reduice it amount, and remove magnetism, make it stick to surfaces instead, and cut in half throw range. While you do that implement alternatives like breaching charge for desteuction of environment.

[oblique steppe]

Tank front armour doesn't needs buffs. I could argue it could use nerfs. 10 HEAT rockets is a lot. Like, A LOT. Problem is with frontal hit box being often ignored, and hits counting for side/top hitbox, and with lack of survivability from sides and rear.
Given how many players and avalible flanks there is, vehicles survivability profiles should be more like in Planetside 2 than in BF. Two shots from the rear is bad idea, given how easy it is to flank a tank that isn't camping 300m away from you or in safe zone.

[oblique steppe]

The main problem with balancing tandem isn't ERA or its lack. It's the idiotic idea of making it deal 2.2x damage of HEAT while having no meaningful downsides.
Sure, it has shorter range, but still more them enough to punish any player that decided to exit safe zone.
Sure, you have only 3 shot, yet still enough to solo a tank, kill it from rear or side, AND you still can run OP C4, and AV nades at the same time.
Tandem doesn't really have a place in a game like BBR, because dubling alpha damage is just stupidly bad idea. Any reaonable downside to balance that out would make tandem terrible to play with.

[dawn heart]

I think you're on the right track, but off a bit on the playstyle and methods of which to improve vehicle survivability.

• Every class has C4. It shouldn't.

• Most GOOD Armored Vehicle players do genuinely retreat and repair or have another player ready at the repairs. Maybe repair points at objectives, to encourage engaging more, but even that's a bit of a stretch.

-Anti tank mines have their own limitations, and are sufficient tools when the placement has thought behind it.

Pulling the C4 from every class having it, and only those that it makes sense have it, would directly allow Armored Vehicles to have a longer average lifetime, while still not making them oppressive and unfun to infantry.

🤠

[oblique steppe]

Eeh, the last part is questionable. Sure, removing C4 from most classes will help, yes. But then tandem exists. And it can 2 shot you. Also HEAT is dangerous AF if there is more than one person aiming at you, which isn't hard to achive.

So rebalancing of C4 is a great step forward, but the finish line is still far away

[barren jay]

Gives a way to force a retreat without killing the vehicle outright.
It's only by hitting the rear of the turret and rewards solid flanking.

[barren jay]

The main thing is trying to curb vehicle sniping. Remote turret machine gun, tank HE lobbing, etc. Can't confirm your hits without a kill, less satisfying, less reliable.

[barren jay]

The massive damage bonus is because there is no ERA or other armor to ignore. Add some sort of uparmor and suddenly you can take away its damage bonus without it being redundant.

[oblique steppe]

Flanks are alredy rewarded. And vehicles also alredy spend A LOT of time while RTB, too much even. Which is bad, because it's boring. You are 'playing' but not playing at all. This thing should be inproved on, not dubled down.
Literally no reason to make gameplay more obnoxious, for the sake of 'balancing'

[oblique steppe]

Or just remove it and leave HEAT as a AT option.
Then keep Tandem in Hardcore, when stulidly high alpha damage have sense snd can work when limited like HAT in Squad.

[oblique steppe]

Your goal is commendable, and I agree with it. I also don't like that. But making gameplay obnoxious and unintuitive, in FPS game, is extremely missed idea.
If you want to reduce vehicle sniping then look at games that doesn't have such problem. In this case, BF3 and BF4.
What those games do?
They allow vehicles to be aggressive, rewarding that gameplay while discentivising camping by map design.
Currently vehicles in BBR are just glorified snipers, because they can't do anything else close to resonably well, that's only objectivly viable way to play them, any alternative is sub optimal at best.
But instead of making gameplay worse by some fuckery, just buff vehicles to be able to thrive in environment game forces them to play. Buff thier survivability, buff thier awerness, make them more competent when facing inf, make inf less good against them, because rn inf is better at anti tank than a fucking tanks, for some reason.

[dawn heart]

A medic having C4 makes very little sense to me from the standpoint of having genuine, class oriented gameplay. Having C4 limited to, say, support and engineer MAYBE assault would cut down a large amount of incoming damage to vehicles. Sure people can switch classes and have tandems, heat rounds, etc but that's the whole point of having classes. Makes class identity and role fulfillment redundant.

[swift tartan]

Assault and engie should have c4

With assault having a lot less

[pine oar]

assault gets breching charges, big radius, not alot of damage, engy gets bigger boom but far less(proper demo block), support gets what we get now

[oblique steppe]

Engi shouldn't have as much explosives imo. Sure, he is THE explosive guy, but he already have RPG and then AV nades

It's also quite popular class, however you look at it

Probably second most popular rn

So packing engi with a lot of explosives, and then you have 40 of them per team, may not end well, due to scale

[pine oar]

just support then like bf

...actually did they change the class that had c4? I forget, but it was always just one class and usually support

[oblique steppe]

Recon and support had it

In BF2042 they give it to everyone exept Support class, so ammo/heal guy with revives

[pine oar]

yeah but 2042 was hated for that

[oblique steppe]

Oh yeah.

C5 for everyone is bad

Like, managable on 32v32, but pain in the ass on 64v64

[tender dagger]

Please do not give examples of Battlefield 2042 in those aspects, I believe you in map distribution, but in terms of classes and their balance it was like shit, that is more of a CoD than a BF

It wasn't even made by the OGs of Battlefield, it was made by some guys who believed that what made Battlefield famous were explosions every 2 minutes, I highly doubt they have played any other previous Battlefield

I support the same as Palma, leave Assault and Engineer with C4 and now, those who want C4 take the classes for that, ready

[oblique steppe]

Yeah, it still is bad. AFTER 2 years of changes

It's very good example of what to not do tho

[tender dagger]

The thing is that the base gameplay is the problem, quite a few bugs and problems were fixed, but it still has that gameplay that is too fast at the CoD level, which for a Battlefield game is not what was expected at that level, in fact many veterans expected a more polished gameplay of what we saw in Battlefield V, considered by many the best character movement in the saga