Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The 3-Man MBT Discussion Continued

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The 3-Man MBT Discussion Continued

    I hope you'll pardon the wall of text, but I prepared this for when the PS2 forums come back up, and thought you might enjoy it. :P

    The 3-Man MBT Discussion Continued

    PREFACE

    For those of you just joining us, welcome. For those of you rejoining us from beta, welcome back.

    Let's start by introducing ourselves.

    Hi, my name is Strait Raider, and I'm a tanker. I've been playing PS2 since early-beta. I have never played PS1. I play armour, infantry and air, but prefer to roll armoured. I've played solo and crewed tank variants across a variety of games.

    For those of you new to this discussion, here is a recap.

    OVERVIEW

    This is a continuation of several threads of discussion from the PS2 beta forums on the topic of 3-man or separate driver/gunner MBTs. Some of these threads contained over 20 pages of discussion. To say this issue is heated would be an understatement.

    Currently the driver of an MBT (Medium Battle Tank in PS2 Lore) also controls the main gun at the same time. Some players contend that this is detrimental to the gameplay. The common points are

    - We already have the Lightning as a one-man tank, and the more powerful MBTs sideline this tank when they can be solo played
    - More powerful weapons should require teamwork to use
    - Many players enjoy playing with separate drivers and gunners and would like the ability to play that way
    - It increases "tank spam" as any single player can draw and use the most powerful ground unit in the game

    THE VIEW FROM SOE

    driver as gunner is fun. Plain and simple. Hater's gonna hate. ~ John Smedley via Twitter
    honestly it's better this way. ~ John Smedley via Twitter
    To be very clear - we have thoroughly read the arguments regarding crewed MBTs and at this time we aren't changing. We do have some specific ideas on what we want to do and are still discussing internally. I want to make sure people understand that we are listening. That doesn't always mean we agree. We wanted this game to be more viable for solo play. ~ John Smedley via Twitter
    I did hear Higby say something about if Romney wins MBT drivers can't use the gun anymore. ~John Smedley via Twitter
    ...we're not going to switch over to using a discrete gunner. We're pretty happy with the single dirver being able to gun the tank as well... one of the things that we do want to do is make the secondary weapons on the tanks more powerful so that you are more encouraged to have a secondary driver (sic)... Down the road we want to add certifications for advanced driver to be able to unlock a dedicated gunner slot... and you would have access to additional, more powerful weapons... ~ Matthew Higby via Twitch
    (regarding the Magrider) ...the probable solution for it is... to have that (the fixed gun) be the driver's weapon and... give him access to extremely powerful secondary weapons if you have a dedicated gunner slot activated. ~ Matthew Higby via Twitch
    GIVE THE DRIVER A GUN

    The primary complaint with separating the driver and gunner positions is that the driver won't have anything to do or it won't be rewarding as a driver.

    A simple solution is to give the driver access to another secondary weapon in the same manner as the Liberator. My personal suggestion is that the driver be given access to a forward-facing hull-mounted secondary weapon. (limited to perhaps a Basilisk, Kobalt or maybe a Flamethrower or Fury)

    This gives the driver a competent weapon, without allowing him to man 80% of the tank's firepower by himself. It is inherently a buff to the tank a a whole, but one that I think is easily balanced by the number of players required to effectivey crew the tank. The forward-firing nature of the weapon means that the driver keeps his eyes on the road, where they should be.

    THE LIBERATOR COMPARISON

    A natural comparison to make when discussing the issue of 3-man MBTs is that of the Liberator. The Liberator and MBT are the kings of fire support in the air and on the ground, respectively. Each of them also has a lighter compatriot that fills the 1-man option - the Lightning and the ESF. In the air, solo players take the ESF and teams take the Liberator. On the ground, teams take MBTs and solo players take MBTs.

    The issue here is that a single player in a Liberator can only bring about 20% of its firepower to bear. In an MBT however, a solo player can bring 80% or more of the weapon's firepower to bear. In the Liberator, the pilot and gunner share the responsibility to bring the massive firepower of their weapon to bear. In the current MBTs, the gunner is just along for the ride, there to provide an extra 20% firepower if needed.

    One of the common complaints against the 3-man MBT is that players will not spend certs on guns that they themselves will not use. Contrary to this, the Liberator shows us that players are not necessarily so selfish. Plenty of players cert into advanced weapons for their gunners and enjoy piloting for them.

    THE MAGRIDER CONUNDRUM

    As many of you may have noticed, the Magrider presents a unique challenge for the 3-man MBT concept. The fixed main gun on the current model means that simply handing control of the main gun to a gunner will not work well.

    Two solutions to this issue are proposed - the first is to swap the Magrider's main gun to a turret position, as the other MBTs have. Critics note that this takes away from the uniqueness of the Vanu MBT.

    The second proposal is to reduce the effectiveness of the hull-mounted weapon and increase the effectiveness of the secondary weapon such that the two are roughly equal in strength, with a combined effectiveness roughly equal to the driver+gunner combo of the other two MBTs.

    SOE'S PROPOSED SOLUTION

    Matt Higby has stated that their current intent is to release a cert in the future which will make your MBT a 3-man tank, with the possibility that this will unlock more powerful main guns.

    While it is nice that SOE acknowledges the issue, many of us feel that this is not the ideal solution.

    - A more powerful MBT makes the Lightning even more obsolete
    - It's unnecessary, solo MBTs will fill the role that Lightnings should fill and "Advanced MBTs" will fill the role that regular MBTs should fill
    - It's a bandaid fix to the problem, slapping on a new feature to placate the masses rather than altering the core mechanic to solve the root of the issue

    SUMMARY OF THE 3-MAN MBT PROPOSITION

    POSITIVES
    - Allows for an entirely new playstyle
    - Promotes Teamwork
    - Adds Depth to the game
    - Cuts down on perceived "Tank Spam"
    - Increases the distinction between the Lightning and MBTs
    - Gives the Lightning a more varied role than just "SkyGuard", without the need to overbuff it.

    NEGATIVES
    - Forces solo players to choose the Lightning
    - Players expecting 1-man MBTs may experience shock, anger and disgust when unable to drive/gun
    - MBT might require minor buffs to represent it being a 3-man asset
    - Drivers could get bored
    - Gunners could get frustrated


    PS. Please don't quote the entire post. That just makes a mess.
    Teamwork and Tactics are OP


    Strait /strāt/ (Noun) A narrow passage of water connecting two seas or two large areas of water: "the Northumberland Strait".

  • #2
    Re: The 3-Man MBT Discussion Continued

    I feel like you've simplified the distinction between the lightning and the vanguard and the ESF and lib. You seem to be under the assumption that the only distinction between the role of the lightning and the vanguard is the number of people required to crew it. I dont think this is the case, rather the vanguard is a sluggish and relatively immobile wall of steel designed for standoffs and frontal assuaults, while the lightning is fast and nimble and designed for flanking and hit and run tactics.

    Requiring another crew member for the vanguard without changing anything else would actually make it pretty useless, seeing as the lightning has about the same firepower as the vanguard but only requires half the crew.
    On the other hand, offering a more powerful 3 man version of the vanguard while keeping the lightning and 1man vanguard as they are now, would make a lot more sense. You'd get an increase in firepower along with the increase in the required manpower, meaning that there is still a reason to use it. At the same time, the 1man vanguard will not take over the lightnings role, just like it isn't currently.

    In summary, by adding a 3man cert you can keep the current playstyles of solo lightning and solo vanguard alive, while adding an option for a driver/gunner configuration that is desirable because it packs a larger punch. More options rather than less options.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: The 3-Man MBT Discussion Continued

      The Vanguard is the least maneuverable of the 3 MBTs, and even it can reach 55 kmh compared to 70 in the Lightning and is nearly as nimble.

      That being said, I've always been a strong proponent of the Lightning/MBT team working best with the New Conglomerate. My reasoning is that the Vanguard is the least maneuverable of the MBTs, which makes the Lightning a better compliment to it.

      By contrast, the Vanu Magrider is actually more nimble than the Lightning, though with a significantly lower top speed.

      The TR's Prowler has nearly the same speed and maneuverability as the Lightning while having all the power advantages of an MBT. Frankly, if the Prowler weren't a sub-par MBT overall, I can't see why any TR would ever drive the Lightning.

      Particularly before the last patch (which nearly doubled Lightning ammo and increased damage of 100mm guns) there was little to no reason to take the Lightning over an MBT.

      The Lightning is also handicapped by poor terrain crossing ability. (the poor design allows it to get stuck easily, and is frequently slowed by the fenders hitting the ground)

      In short, I don't feel that the Lightning has a role. (AA aside) Even in the Vanguard the only thing I can't do very well is chase down fleeing Lightnings, and even then I can usually chase them to a position from which I can smoke them. I'd be okay with the MBTs being all-round bringers of death if they were 3-man operations, but right now playing as a solo MBT just feels like... cheating.


      If they do follow through on the 3-man MBT cert, I would like to see them tweak the Lightning for a bit more speed to put the solo Lightning a bit more on par with the solo MBTs - as that is essentially what the baseline MBTs will become.

      The other apprehension that I have with the 3-man concept is that they're going to have to make the 3-man MBT pretty darn powerful in order to justify its use. Even if they doubled the firepower of a driver+gunner MBT gun, a driver+gunner MBT would still lose handily. In a straight fight, the gunner+driver tank is destroyed at the same time the first of the two one-manned tanks are destroyed. That's a pretty big loss margin for a gun with double the power.

      I think it will be very, very difficult to walk the line of making the 3-man MBT useful without making it overpowered. I believe that cutting out the solo MBT would give more wiggle room - rather than balancing versus solo MBTs they would only have to balance against solo Lightnings.
      Teamwork and Tactics are OP


      Strait /strāt/ (Noun) A narrow passage of water connecting two seas or two large areas of water: "the Northumberland Strait".

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: The 3-Man MBT Discussion Continued

        The lightning might not be completely where it needs to be, but thats just a question of balance. Its role is not going to change. One thing you're actually forgetting to mention in regards to the lightning is its much smaller profile. It helps it quite a lot in its hit and run role.
        Another thing you're forgetting is that while 1 2man tank might lose to 2 1man tanks, the math isn't quite as simple. First off, in order for the fight to be optimal, all tanks would need to have secondary gunners with an AV weapon as well, making it 4man vs 3man. Secondly there is the matter of resources and cooldowns. By using a gunner and a driver you effectively halve the amount of resources and cooldown required, as the gunner and driver can take turns spawning a new tank.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: The 3-Man MBT Discussion Continued

          Here's my issue with the entire MBT debate.


          Out of all the crew served weapons platforms, only the MBT allows the driver to gun also. Just goes against the entire design of the game and the stressing of team work.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: The 3-Man MBT Discussion Continued

            Originally posted by Biytor View Post
            Here's my issue with the entire MBT debate.


            Out of all the crew served weapons platforms, only the MBT allows the driver to gun also. Just goes against the entire design of the game and the stressing of team work.
            Tbh, the only equivalent is the liberator, and the main gun on that would be impossible for the pilot to operate anyway. I obviously dont count the sunderer and galaxy as they're transport vehicles, and dont actually have a main gun, only secondaries.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: The 3-Man MBT Discussion Continued

              Originally posted by Feriluce View Post
              Tbh, the only equivalent is the liberator, and the main gun on that would be impossible for the pilot to operate anyway. I obviously dont count the sunderer and galaxy as they're transport vehicles, and dont actually have a main gun, only secondaries.

              Exactly. The Liberator requires 2 players to be effective, the MBT requires only one. What's going to happen when the buggies are introduced? Will the driver get the main gun on that one too, not likely...

              My whole point is it the current set-up from the MBT goes against the whole point of the games stress on teamwork. They removed the customization from the loadouts from PS1 to avoid the 1 man army scenario, but removed the 2 man requirement to fully field a MBT. That just feeds the entire lone wolf ideology that the inventory system fed in PS1. There are already 1 man versions in the game (ESF & Lightening) why muddy the waters further by adding another 1 man tank in game?

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: The 3-Man MBT Discussion Continued

                Well I would hope they at least add the option to three man a tank if you so please. That being said, 1 tank vs 1 tank, the one with the driver/gunner combo is going to be more effective then a tank with just a driver. However separate that driver/gunner combo into two tanks is going to be more effective overall, than they would be together in one tank.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: The 3-Man MBT Discussion Continued

                  Originally posted by johnflenaly View Post
                  Well I would hope they at least add the option to three man a tank if you so please. That being said, 1 tank vs 1 tank, the one with the driver/gunner combo is going to be more effective then a tank with just a driver. However separate that driver/gunner combo into two tanks is going to be more effective overall, than they would be together in one tank.
                  Well, maybe. Under very specific conditions (one person certed heavily into the tank, one person certed heavily into the engineer, and they aren't playing VS so the engineer can actually repair the tank without risking being magmowed) I could see that specific group of two being more effective than two random people. Of course, two people certed into the tank and some engineer would be more effective than the two people in my example...

                  Basically, I like MBTs as they are. As someone who doesn't want to waste points certing into tanks, I like being able to pull a Lightning 100HE and go absolutely mess up infantry blobs in a blaze of speed and explosions, then hop in a certed out MBT and be useful while I wait to repair them. It gives me something to do in a tank fight that isn't "spam rockets" or "hold down repair tool and/or hide", since I am choosing to be less effective in tanks and better at infantry combat. Not everything is in isolation.

                  I would like to see a full 3man tank that just messes things up, though, in addition to the current MBTs. (Oh, and re: Libs, you don't see them anywhere near as much as ESFs BECAUSE you need cert points for the gun. And when I do see Libs, they're either rare or the pilot has the CAS30 gun and is wrecking faces with it rather than giving their gunner great shots)
                  I can ADS using more than a 2x without significant stutter! This was a good patch.

                  Comment

                  Connect

                  Collapse

                  TeamSpeak 3 Server

                  Collapse

                  Advertisement

                  Collapse

                  Twitter Feed

                  Collapse

                  Working...
                  X