To create more dynamic tank combat instead of the current "Drive up to tank, unload weapons and still not do enough harm to the enemy I would like if we could reduce the health of armours a bit. Ambushing a tank would really becomes a valid tactic, instead of the "oh, I'm under attack". Engineers won't be able to repair their tanks in battle, because their tank will be destroyed before they manage to repair it in battle and infantry would have a easier time surviving in the battlefield, actually being able to damage tanks rather than the current peashooters we have, where tanks can just "TROLOLOLOLO chain gun, TROLOLOLOLO". Pros: More fun tank combat Shit dies faster Infantry can help their team more. Requires no Code support Cons: Shit dies faster
Alternatives: Make tanks take twice as much damage from tanks and only tanks. <--Still depends on whether this would really make tank combat more fun. Might make Heavy tanks underpowered because they can't move fast enough to dodge. Do extensive testing on various balance changes to try an make tank combat faster and more fun. <--Never gonna happen anytime soon.
I already did this for the next version, but then I reverted it in case we went live with little testing. If we get a full test setup then I'll re-add the 50% armour nerfs back in.
50%? Well tanks get destroyed pretty fast this way... but maybe testing shows something interesting. Current state is: plain armored vehicles gets destroyed ultimately fast, and unfunny for the vehicle side, so it should remain as it is, only plain. Researched armors: 50% hp, but increased special effect. (like bio resistance for reactive) ? Just asked.
This is why battlefield vehicle combat is fun, cause shit blows up from only a small bit of rocket hits, which is fun. Just make tanks cost 10-25% less cause then they would be overpriced newspaper stands
though i have to agree with michaels concerns. i have another idea to throw into the pot. what about you make every armor available at -50% health, scrap plain and make a +25-30% health buff researchable in replacement of the current armor research?
Meh, bad thread. This isn't a "suggestion" as much as advise. A suggestion is a new option that didn't exist before. I think it's painfully obvious that scaling armor is always on the chop block, so it never needs to be "suggested".
Ok, let's stop giving the devs feedback of what we would like to have changed in the game and let's everyone just ask for jetpacks. A suggestion is a suggestion about change, not new things.
At the moment a absorbant med can drive into a group of 4 enemy tanks and will survive insanly long with some doding. So yes less armor
Also, ambushing is essentially impossible up against a player who knows how to look at the mini map thanks to AUTO SPOT because you can see any hostile vehicle through hills and walls. as long as they are within the spotting distance.
Grens arnt under powered, you just need two working as a team to take on a heavy, but since thats too hard, just make tanks weaker. More importantly, Are any of the armor values being changed? or are they staying exactly the same as they are now, meaning that after having all armor HP cut in half, Abs will still be the all round best, and armors like reflective and reactive will be ultra shit, and on that note. Will the cost per plate remain the same for all armor types? Because i dont feel like waiting to get my 1.2k heavy tank that will die in 15 seconds after encountering two or three well coordinated grens.
and if its 15 heavies? thats only 2 grens per heavy if the whole team is gren, still not really a threat. also this would mean no engies, so no ammoz, revives and heals and no rifleman to protect them. the only positive sideeffect would be no scunts. no tank, not even a full op armor heavy, should be tougher then a current medium.
Why is balancing always done by hammering the values by ridiculously big multipliers? ಠ_ಠ 50% changes on variables is going to have profound effects on game play that will require extensive testing (which will not happen) and will brake a lot of related game mechanics. It seems that this is the way that the balancing has always been done in empires. If somebody does not like something then they will either make it twice as powerful or extremely weak compared to the last iteration. Of course in those cases the new dynamics will be all out of balance and we never reach a stable and balanced game. Why not try to make adjustments with 10-5% changes?
