Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Korny

Suggestion TANKS etc

Recommended Posts

 

Tanks
!-T-72 is old soviet tank with thin armor, while Abrams and Leo are pretty much high end. It’s not fair to put them in the same or near the performance. So i suggest nurfing T-72 or buffing Abrams and Leo.
For comperasson tanks HPs, will make a illusion of thicker armor
*Example*
T-72: 1000Hp
Leo:1750HP

Abrams:2000Hp
(Never seen someone to play with Abrams, it may help)
Suggestion->different hit points on the tanks so it would make every player play differently with a tank
**
!-The cameras for Leo and Abrams should be more harder to break like their HP for example. Over all the cameras are too easy to destroy.
!- The amount of credits should be reduced for T-72 (after all it’s going to be huge nurf). It would make more people think what kind of tank they want in battlefield. It would give more variety in the game. Some people would love to be with the best tank but for the price or just cheap tank early in the game.
*Example*
T-72 without equipment 3k or more
Leo without equipment 5k or more
Abrams without equipment 5,5k or more
**
- When tanks are updated with different equipment, at some point some equipment should be pointless and too pricey but left out so people can make their bad choices themselves like in real world.
*Example*
T-72 with best equipment 5,5k but it would be less powerful then Leo. While if balanced 4,5 it would give the same performance with 5,5k of worth.
**
NEXT TANKS If you think to add new tanks i think its good idea to add next by number:
1.T-14
2.Merkava
3.Type 10(japan)
4.Challenger ll
5.Type 99(China)
*PL-01


Anti-tank mines
I had some chat with people who actually planted mines. It’s a game so not going to put strategy here.
-So the anti-tank mine is planted to immobilize or if possible destroy viacal, light armor viacal and tanks. On explosion hardly can destroy a tank(it’s possible, happened with Leo in Syria) but it would immobilize it for sure.
*Example*
Chance of destruction to be ⅓.
Chance of immobilize(till someone goes and fixes the chain like the cameras) and 10-30 sec of fire which will lead to destruction of the tank if not fixed in a way ⅓ .

Chance of immobilize of the tank and left with 15%HP (look up for HP of the tank {they would have different hp and different chances of destruction})
**

Light armored vehicles have higher chances of destruction
*Example*

Chance of destruction ½

Chance of immobilization without way of fixing it and 10-30 sec or less of fire which will lead to destruction of the vehicles ½
**
!Every other vehicles like buggy should get destroyed without chances.
-If possible to show where the anti-tank mine will land when it may be thrown on the ground.
-If possible anti-tank mines to be hard to spot on the dirt.
-When vehicles goes with high speed thru anti-tank mines it should continue going even after being destroyed and possible to trigger one more anti-tank mine if it’s body goes thru it.
If tank goes like this thru 2 mines with high speed with really the chances of destruction would be ⅔ . Of course the anti-tank mines should be with some distance from each other. If they are stacked they should do the same damage and chance ⅓ of destruction. Players will think how to place them.

??-Anti-tank mine shouldn’t get triggered by vehicles if not pressed. So the gap between the chains(body) shouldn’t trigger the mine. But of course it would make anti-tank mines useless in game. It’s depatable if should be putted in the game.
 

Anti-tank missiles
-After all if tanks those days have one common threat and it’s anti-tank missiles. They pretty much can destroy any type of tank, of course depends on the model of the missles. So it would be better to add 1-2 type. And you can place them on random locations so fighting tanks would be easier. RPGs are easy and cheap but are not really high tec and doesn’t have much punch in modern tanks.

Capturesadadsasa.PNG

Edited by Korny
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm.... Maybe you should turn off the computer and go back to an abacus - Your fonts are all messed up... It's ok Korny, we still love you. ?

Edited by Meatsac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 часа назад, Korny сказал:

T-72 is old soviet tank with thin armor

Okay. I've read enough.

And about mines, If u want them to have only a "chance" to destroy tanks, then u should allow to bury them in the ground so they will be not so visible as they are now. Or they will be useless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, tynblpb said:

Okay. I've read enough.

And about mines, If u want them to have only a "chance" to destroy tanks, then u should allow to bury them in the ground so they will be not so visible as they are now. Or they will be useless.

I agree in parts. Hard to spot in the mud would be completely fine. Mines overall are used for strategy irl. And if it's left like this it feels static. Every person who knows how anti-tank mines work would feel little awkward in the game. So that's why if you ask me those chances are good idea, plus they still do a lot of dmg. After all it would leave the tank with 15% or less hp from full hp.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IFVs and AFVs should die outright while tanks should be left with minimal or no mobility. This would introduce an ambush strategy.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with the new tanks and i also would like add a few tanks: French Leclerc and Turkish Altay. I don't much know about the characteristics of these tanks but they'd be cool features when west europe and middle east join the war

 

Edit: also south korean k2 black panther

Edited by redmatch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/9/2019 at 3:25 AM, TZoningHard said:

mines irl break the tracks instead of out right destroying tanks.

If tanks get disabled than there is no way for them to escape death in any way. Tank cannot move and there will be fucking 6 RPG's coming for a piece of tank ass...

I still think RPG's should get a limited amount per team / squad

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That IS the ambush strat I'm talking about Matt. Also limiting the amount of RPGs to balance one threat is dumb. We got a lot of stuff that needs to be smacked with an RPG.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Matt_dOvale said:

If tanks get disabled than there is no way for them to escape death in any way. Tank cannot move and there will be fucking 6 RPG's coming for a piece of tank ass...

I still think RPG's should get a limited amount per team / squad

Yes, that's the idea about being with disabled tank.
I don't think it should be limited, more like complete 180 deg. Less DMG in the RPGs and to give more RPG rockets to a person. But hey that's my opinion so....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Korny said:

Igen, ez az a gondolat, hogy a fogyatékkal élő tartályról van szó.
Nem hiszem, hogy ez korlátozott lenne, inkább 180 fokos. Kevesebb DMG az RPG-kben, és több RPG rakéta adása egy személynek. De hé, ez az én véleményem.

You just have to balance rpg. "Nerf"
It's too easy to use.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...