Tank Overhaul Complete Breakdown - Update 5.2

«1345
IIIAZURAIII
6 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member

Disclaimer: all of the following info has been compiled by myself and if there are any typographical errors, I am solely responsible (meaning this post is not written by DICE).  The raw data is provided by DICE and I have processed those to present it in a more readable format. Please feel free to use any of the information below for content creation or personal use, credits appreciated: www.youtube.com/azuraproductions

If you prefer to listen to the post with some additional comments: https://youtu.be/RJYKBJdlCXM


TL;DR

  1. Tank TTK will increase slightly. 

  2. Tank angle curve no longer follows a linear drop off, instead it only has 3 tiers of FLAT damage: Ricochet (min), standard (normal), critical (max) for each part of the tank (front, side, rear)

  3. Turret will now have a decreased impact damage multiplier across the board to eliminate the “when in doubt, hit the turret” meta. 

  4. Tanks will generally survive slightly longer because of the nerf of several shells (e.g. Sherman HEAT shell) as well as the change in the angle.  But in cases of heavy tank angling users, your tank may die sooner than before. 

  5. AT/AP shells are not as effective as before compared to HE shells against high multiplier parts like the rear.  HE shells generally saw a buff against tanks whereas AP shells saw a nerf. (AP/AT shells are still very effective against armor, just not as big of a gap to HE shells as before).  

  6. It will now be easier to deal a decent amount of damage to tanks but harder to deal devastating blows per hit.  

  7. Coaxial machine guns will see a buff in damage drop off.

  8. Most HE shells will see a small buff in blast radius.

  9. LVT/Ka Mi HMG will see a drastic nerf (but may still be viable).

  10. Tank vs tank fight skill gap will decrease in terms of mastering the tank mechanics. The focus will shift towards tactic based skills (movement, flanks, situational awareness). 

  11. AT mines will see a decrease in damage but will have a 100% chance of disabling tracks/engine if tanks rolled directly on top of one (e.g. 25 damage per mine to medium tanks)

  12. DICE is open to dialogue and change.  Coaxial buff was done in real time when I brought up the issue showing evidence of how under power it is.  


Upcoming 5.2 update will bring a complete overhaul for tanks and anti tank gadgets.  There will be major changes to the way armor angles work as well as a complete re-balance of the tank shells.  The intention of these changes per DICE blog post is to empower tankers to play the objective. 


MAJOR CHANGES TO ANGLES

For tank angling, there will be massive changes to its mechanics.  Before, incoming shell damage highly depends on the exact angle of the tank down to the degree.  There are also ricochet hits dealing as low as 1 damage. Good angle broadside hit may also sometimes be read as a bad top down hit causing it to ricochet despite having a seemingly good hit.  This update aims to simplify all the angles and to fix the unintended effects of extremely low damage ricochet hits and getting ricochets when you are not supposed to.


Below are going to be graphs comparing the damage curve of the previous (5.0, yellow) version and the new (5.2, blue) updated version.  The linear drop off for all the damage curves will now be simplified by having only 2 or 3 tiers of damage depending on the tank. This was communicated in the previous blog post from DICE stating that the 3 tiers will be: ricochet, normal, critical (BIG) hits.  




Ricochet hits will now deal at least a decent amount of damage.  Repeated ricochet hits will now yield a higher DPS. E.g. the default Sherman M3 75mm cannon will deal a minimum of 11.6 damage to the Type 97 Chi Ha’s front if the shell ricocheted.  


Normal hits, which cover the majority of the hits will be standardized to one value per shell per enemy tank across a wide range of angle (e.g. 30-80 degrees on a medium tank side) instead of the exact angle you are at on the linear line.  Repeated normal hits will now give roughly the same pacing as the current (5.0) version would. This is sort of the baseline DICE aimed to achieve: dealing roughly 20 damage per shot to a medium tank from a medium tank on an average shot. So for example, a Panzer IV PAK 40 (KwK 40 L/48) cannon will deal 20 damage to a Valentine Mk VIII’s side between angles 30 and 80.  This allows for more consistency between various shots. There is a negative consequence to switch to this step-wise system as opposed to the linear drop system. For players who are masters of tank angling (or the ones who watched my previous videos and learned the magic 40 degree trick), they will not have as much of an advantage from angling their tank. The current (5.0) system allows you to angle your tank so that the incoming shell can deal as low as 0.5x the impact damage (shells  have both impact and blast damage; AP shells have much more emphasis on impact damage) whether the shell hit the front or the side. The new (5.2) system will decrease the effectiveness of tank angling by having a constant 1x impact multiplier across a wide angle. Despite that, it will still be important to angle your tank past 10 degrees for the most part, otherwise you can take up to 1.5x impact damage to the front or 2x impact damage to the front tracks. This also applies to the side armor and it will favor the players who did not previously have the discipline to precisely control their tank angle.  In a head to head stand off tank vs tank fight, the skill gap will decrease by a bit.  


Critical hits will be the maximum damage you can deal to a tank and the angles that allows for such a hit has narrowed by a significant amount.  Repeated critical hits will give roughly the same performance if not minimally higher DPS as repeated critical hits before. Before, as long as the angle is decent, you can deal a massive hit to the enemy even if it is not at the perfect angle due to the linear drop off.  With the new 5.2 system, once you are outside the most optimal angle, the impact damage multiplier will literally drop off a cliff back to normal hits described above. For example, a Panzer IV PAK 40 (KwK 40 L/48) cannon can deal 20 damage to a Valentine Mk VIII’s side on a normal hit at 79 degrees but if it is hit at 81 degrees, it can deal 35 damage.  That’s quite a huge increase. The rear of the tank will remain as the weakest part of the tank with a much looser angle. The same shell can deal 44 damage to the rear of the Valentine tank as long as it was 60 degrees or more.  


Because of this particular change, certain tanks’ front armor will now be incapable of receiving a critical hit.  Those will include all versions of the Churchill tank, Tiger I, Sturmtiger, the StuG IV and the historic front (in game rear / mantlet side) of the Valentine Archer.  To circumvent this, you can aim at the tracks of these tanks to deal a critical side damage hit as long as it is past 80 degrees. 


The turret will also see a significant change in the damage multiplier.  In the current build, tank turret is a fail safe target to hit if the body of the enemy tank is at an optimal angle to deflect incoming shells .  It creates the “when in doubt, hit the tank turret” meta. This update will see a change to that mentality by reducing the impact damage multiplier from 1.6x to 1x for most tanks, meaning it will deal just as much as a normal hit on the front/side/rear.  There are some exceptions, for the Staghound and the Panzer 38T, its turret multiplier is now at 1.2 instead of 1.67 previously but still better than the 1x multiplier of the normal hits on its body. So the previous tank turret meta still holds somewhat true against those 2 tanks unless you can land a >80 degree shot to any side of its armor.  


COMPLETE REBALANCE OF TANK SHELLS

After looking at the graphs for the changes in angle, one might find that the blue line (5.2) is generally on top of the yellow line (5.0), meaning it has a larger multiplier on average.  The first impression may suggest that tanks will be taking more damage from any given shell / infantry anti-tank rockets but that is before we take a look at the massive re-balance of the damage for all the tank shells and man portable anti tank weapons.  Overall, we see a significant reduction of the impact damage for most if not all AP tank shells of roughly 20%. There are 2 shells that saw a disproportionate nerf:

  • Sherman Calliope main gun: -32%

  • Sherman HEAT-T: -43%


There are a few selected AP shells that actually got a buff: 

  • Staghound Littlejohn AP: 4% 

  • Churchill Mk VII AP: 6%

  • Type 97 Chi Ha 57mm AT: 50%


Most of the High Explosive (HE) shells did not see the baseline 20% nerf for impact damage alone.  Some actually saw a buff:

  • Panzer IV PAK 40 HE: 4%

  • Type 97 57mm HE: 15%

  • LVT 37mm M6 HE: 18%

  • Ka Mi 37mm HE: 18%

  • Ka Mi 75mm HE: 25%

  • LVT 75mm M6 HE: 40%

  • Hachi 47mm HE: 70%

  • Churchill MkVII HE: 72%



Please note that all of the above are impact damage changes, which is only part of the damage dealt to tanks.  


The formula to tank damage

[Impact damage x angle multiplier x impact material modifier] + [blast damage x blast material modifier]


With that in mind, one can see that the damage gap against tanks between HE and AP shells have drastically decreased.  



Impact damage and blast damage values are the raw values and the rest of the numbers were calculated by myself (assume tanks have 1000hp, I apologize if there are any mistakes). 


Please ignore the actual damage against tanks for howitzers and HESH shells as they follow a much more complicated formula (one that is beyond my knowledge so the number shown on the chart is not entirely accurate).  But howitzers will remain as effective anti-personnel weapons and HESH shells will continue to deal massive damage to tanks.   The blast radius of all howitzer cannons also standardized and will not vary from one to another. (blast radius in v5.2 has been lowered accidentally with a OHK radius of 2.3m, intention = 3.1m)

LVT and Ka Mi HMG will also see a drastic nerf to somewhat match the damage of the wirbelwind in terms of dps.


It will now take 4 bullets to kill within 15m, 5 bullets to kill between 15-75m and then 6 bullets to kill beyond that.  Spread will also follow the coaxial model of converging accuracy where the first few bullets will not be as accurate. Infantry will no longer be deleted the moment this AA gun sees them.  Anti-air and anti-tank capabilities should remain unchanged.



COAXIAL GUNS BUFF

Coaxial guns will see a buff due to its previous nerf being too harsh.  Expect something along the lines of v5.0 = 12m(4BTK)/75m(8BTK) to 30m(4BTK)/100m(8BTK). 



CHANGES TO INFANTRY ANTI-TANK WEAPONS

AT mines and dynamites will now deal slightly less damage (AT mines much more so) than before but is much more potent at disabling tank parts. 

  • AT mines / Dynamites will have a 100% chance of disabling the tank track/engine if the tank rolled on top of them.

  • One AT mine will deal a maximum of 28 damage to light tanks, 25 damage to medium tanks and 20 damage to heavy tanks. 

  • One Dynamite will deal a maximum of 42 damage to light tanks, 38 damage to medium tanks and 30 damage to heavy tanks.

  • One assault will spawn with 2 of either AT mines or dynamites and can resupply to hold up to 3.  Up to a total of 6 AT mines can be placed at the same time after multiple resupply runs. 


Because of the angle changes to tanks, they will also affect infantry anti-tank projectile weapons such as the AT grenade pistol, PIAT and the panzerfaust. It will now require better angles to deal massive hits to tanks similar to tank shells. 

  • Example: Panzerfaust can deal a minimum of 8 damage for the worst possible shot against a medium tank, 11 damage for most shots and then 25 damage if you land a perfect shot to its engine. 

  • PIAT can deal 15; 21; 45 damages for the above scenarios respectively

  • AT pistols can deal 6; 9; 22 damages for the above scenarios respectively. 



EARLY IMPRESSION

My impression is solely based on looking at these numbers and may not be entirely accurate  during actual gameplay.  


Overall, this update changes up a lot of things.  It made tank vs tank combat a lot more straightforward without as much nuances in the mechanics.  The focus of tank vs tank combat will now shift towards movement, situational awareness and flanks.  You will now be slightly less successful at face tanking an enemy tank simply by harnessing the power of armor angling (it is still somewhat effective, just nowhere near as much as before).   This will now allow new tank users to not get destroyed by an experience user as quickly in a 1 vs 1 face to face tank fight.  


However, the majority of the tankers’ complaints lie on the fact that infantry players can easily destroy their tanks unless they stay all the way back from action, leading to a campy play style. 

And with this update, tankers may see a slight increase in survivability against infantry at a distance due to a decrease in ranged AT gadgets’ damage.  However, if the infantry players are able to get close to an enemy tank, it can be devastating to the tanks because of the improved ability for infantry to immobilize tanks with the AT mines. They can then deliver heavy blows to the tanks’ rear with more explosives and rockets.  But that is not all bad news against infantry. Internal playtests from DICE appeared to have found that tanks are able to escape from an objective easier if it become overrun. Also, tanks’ turret had seen a decreased reduction in turn speed from being disabled in the 5.0 patch from -75% to -25%.  The coaxial machine guns will also see a slight buff from a drastic nerf we received in the 5.0 patch. The blast radius for most HE shells will also see an improvement of roughly 8% and 14% for the Panzer IV and StuG IV’s L37 HE shell (short barrel).  


I personally PTFO even in the current build quite extensively but an average tanker may find this difficult.  This patch aims to especially help those players to survive longer against other tanks as well as other infantry.  DICE should be monitoring the changes and will continue adjusting areas that seem inadequate. The actual goal of the tank overhaul should be to empower tankers to play the objective more, and that is not to say you need to be in the middle of the objective at all times because that is simply not smart.  Whether this patch is enough encourage tankers to change their play style and push the objective without an immense fear of no return the moment they attack has yet to be determined. In cases where further adjustments may be needed, DICE should be open to continue adjusting the values to help find the right balance. 



POSSIBLE CHANGES IN A FUTURE UPDATE (no confirmation)

  1. Tank track disable may possibly see a change to decrease its effect.

  2. First person “input lag” design may be revisited.

  3. Acceleration curve may be changed in tanks with disabled tracks

  4. Heavy tanks may see a reduction in blast damage taken from infantry

  5. Howitzer shells will see an increase in blast radius to better reflect its current form. 

Comments

  • YourLocalPlumber
    3121 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited November 28
    Thankfully they buffed Churchill's damage across the board. This putrid tank is obsolete compared to Valentine.

    Thank you for amazing post. 10/10
  • ProAssassin2003
    3549 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited November 28
    AT mines / Dynamites will have a 100% chance of disabling the tank track/engine if the tank rolled on top of them.

    One AT mine will deal a maximum of 28 damage to light tanks, 25 damage to medium tanks and 20 damage to heavy tanks.

    One Dynamite will deal a maximum of 42 damage to light tanks, 38 damage to medium tanks and 30 damage to heavy tanks.

    One assault will spawn with 2 of either AT mines or dynamites and can resupply to hold up to 3. Up to a total of 6 AT mines can be placed at the same time after multiple resupply runs.



    How does this not read as a complete Buff to AT Gadgets and Infantry Vs Tanks. This is a 100% Nerf to Tanks in every way. All this information is a Huge Nerf to Tanks yet again and will not only make Tank Camping worse it will be the only option. As a Tanker this will be a disaster.

    This isn't even taking into account that zero changes are being made to repairs, resupply and movement for Tanks.
  • SmokeD_BabooN
    490 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    I dont get those changes. In fact angling is a factual tactic. A slightly angled tonk, facing forward and being hit in front should receive no damage and a 100% ricochet. Even so if armour is sloped in front. I dont get it how devs claim fight is more straightforward, because angling means also movement of that tonk, in a better or more lethal position. If they go down to that slope then get rid of angling, get rid of ricocheing and any hit does the same damage except rear damage that has to have a 2x damage than a normal hit. Like in bf4.  

    They go the middle road and reach in the middle of nowhere. So ricocheing is not a ricoche but a slighlty less damage hit than a normal hit.

    I dont get the turret hits also. Turrets are the most vulnerable parts of tanks, aside engines, high risk high reward principle. Hits to the turret unless angled or front, should be counted normal/critical. Basically if a tanker wants to camp behind an obstacle he will be better protected including his most exposed part.

    I dont get under these circumstances, nerfing assault damage with at weapons.

    The only good thing I see is mines behaviour.

    And I am a tanker also.


  • VincentNZ
    3499 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    What good are mines, if it can not kill with the three mines you get from topping off? What good are PFs if you can only deal 33 on a regular basis? Even if you think you can land a perfect shot, it is still inconsistent.
    And how is this going to help against playing the tanks optimally at 200m on a hill? The AT gadgets have an effective range of 50m and deal inconsistent damage, if they deal damage at all at further ranges. Also The further the tank is away the longer it will take to flank to get a good shot. And this will mean flanking into enemy territory. Let us take the optimal case for infantry: Twisted Steel on C. Tank is 30m away, a lot of cover. So if I want to get a rear angle, I have to do a quarter circle to get to the side and another 30m to get a good back angle. Not factoring in enemy or that the tank can see me. That is a movement of 70-80m just to get a perfect angle at close range. If you make the distance longer you can multiply that again.
    Instead they could have just removed angling, for AT gadgets, make it deal less damage overall, like 20 flat and make the AT gadgets work up to 100-150m, so you can actually inconvenience these hillcampers.
  • SmokeD_BabooN
    490 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    VincentNZ said:
    What good are mines, if it can not kill with the three mines you get from topping off? What good are PFs if you can only deal 33 on a regular basis? Even if you think you can land a perfect shot, it is still inconsistent.
    And how is this going to help against playing the tanks optimally at 200m on a hill? The AT gadgets have an effective range of 50m and deal inconsistent damage, if they deal damage at all at further ranges. Also The further the tank is away the longer it will take to flank to get a good shot. And this will mean flanking into enemy territory. Let us take the optimal case for infantry: Twisted Steel on C. Tank is 30m away, a lot of cover. So if I want to get a rear angle, I have to do a quarter circle to get to the side and another 30m to get a good back angle. Not factoring in enemy or that the tank can see me. That is a movement of 70-80m just to get a perfect angle at close range. If you make the distance longer you can multiply that again.
    Instead they could have just removed angling, for AT gadgets, make it deal less damage overall, like 20 flat and make the AT gadgets work up to 100-150m, so you can actually inconvenience these hillcampers.
    Main counter to a tank should be another tank not assault. I think the new patch will force even more hillhump behaviour to camp because assaults are already the most used class in game. Even though mines have a damage drop off, disabling tracks means sure death.

    They have to tweak assault-tank relation and I think they went wrong all the way. Instead they "tweaked" tank vs tank battles :shoot first, hit first, equip HE, reload faster=win.

    As casual as it gets.

    Tl/dr=no skill, just like assault kit as of now.


  • MogwaiWarrior
    814 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    It’s good to see the changes but I see nothing about the biggest problem with tanks and that’s the self moving tank. As soon as I stop and ADS the tanks starts moving on it’s own. It’s really bad in the lighter tanks.
  • NLBartmaN
    3667 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Great post with lots of information, but if this will make me PTFO more with a tank (like I do in BF1) ... I don't know ...

    The biggest issues are the OP Assaults, all the detail in the maps that get you stuck or unstable/make Assaults invisible and prevent you to shoot at an Assault/Stationary canon right in front of you, because the canon can not aim down enough.

    I will still keep my distance (not on a hill but far enough) and will only move in with a full team surrounding and defending me. (99% of the players are too lazy/dumb/obsessed with their K/D to destory mines, but that is a different subject)
  • VincentNZ
    3499 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    VincentNZ said:
    What good are mines, if it can not kill with the three mines you get from topping off? What good are PFs if you can only deal 33 on a regular basis? Even if you think you can land a perfect shot, it is still inconsistent.
    And how is this going to help against playing the tanks optimally at 200m on a hill? The AT gadgets have an effective range of 50m and deal inconsistent damage, if they deal damage at all at further ranges. Also The further the tank is away the longer it will take to flank to get a good shot. And this will mean flanking into enemy territory. Let us take the optimal case for infantry: Twisted Steel on C. Tank is 30m away, a lot of cover. So if I want to get a rear angle, I have to do a quarter circle to get to the side and another 30m to get a good back angle. Not factoring in enemy or that the tank can see me. That is a movement of 70-80m just to get a perfect angle at close range. If you make the distance longer you can multiply that again.
    Instead they could have just removed angling, for AT gadgets, make it deal less damage overall, like 20 flat and make the AT gadgets work up to 100-150m, so you can actually inconvenience these hillcampers.
    Main counter to a tank should be another tank not assault. I think the new patch will force even more hillhump behaviour to camp because assaults are already the most used class in game. Even though mines have a damage drop off, disabling tracks means sure death.

    They have to tweak assault-tank relation and I think they went wrong all the way. Instead they "tweaked" tank vs tank battles :shoot first, hit first, equip HE, reload faster=win.

    As casual as it gets.

    Tl/dr=no skill, just like assault kit as of now.


    An Assault is no counter to a tank. 2-4 Assaults is a counter to a tank. So the balance already is in place. That is why nerfing the AT gadgets up close while not adjusting their long range capabilities (like giving them any) is idiotic. It is the same argument as with the rest of the 5.2 patch. They see a problem and try to solve it through directly buffing the issue.
  • GrizzGolf
    1075 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Tanks are going to be useful again??? 
  • llPhantom_Limbll
    5749 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    VincentNZ wrote: »
    (Quote)
    An Assault is no counter to a tank. 2-4 Assaults is a counter to a tank. So the balance already is in place. That is why nerfing the AT gadgets up close while not adjusting their long range capabilities (like giving them any) is idiotic. It is the same argument as with the rest of the 5.2 patch. They see a problem and try to solve it through directly buffing the issue.

    One (1) assault is capable of destroying tank if he's fully loaded. Infantry also has very powerful ability to hide behind any sort of cover while launching projectiles at tanks. And you can easily just simply swarm tank with 5-6 assault kids mostly because it's the most popular class in the game. How can one tank deal with all that? Get close to the objective and spammed with piat, get the engine disabled and die. Simple. The balance will not be achieved until AT gadgets are nerfed.
  • ninjapenquinuk
    1968 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    VincentNZ said:
    VincentNZ said:
    What good are mines, if it can not kill with the three mines you get from topping off? What good are PFs if you can only deal 33 on a regular basis? Even if you think you can land a perfect shot, it is still inconsistent.
    And how is this going to help against playing the tanks optimally at 200m on a hill? The AT gadgets have an effective range of 50m and deal inconsistent damage, if they deal damage at all at further ranges. Also The further the tank is away the longer it will take to flank to get a good shot. And this will mean flanking into enemy territory. Let us take the optimal case for infantry: Twisted Steel on C. Tank is 30m away, a lot of cover. So if I want to get a rear angle, I have to do a quarter circle to get to the side and another 30m to get a good back angle. Not factoring in enemy or that the tank can see me. That is a movement of 70-80m just to get a perfect angle at close range. If you make the distance longer you can multiply that again.
    Instead they could have just removed angling, for AT gadgets, make it deal less damage overall, like 20 flat and make the AT gadgets work up to 100-150m, so you can actually inconvenience these hillcampers.
    Main counter to a tank should be another tank not assault. I think the new patch will force even more hillhump behaviour to camp because assaults are already the most used class in game. Even though mines have a damage drop off, disabling tracks means sure death.

    They have to tweak assault-tank relation and I think they went wrong all the way. Instead they "tweaked" tank vs tank battles :shoot first, hit first, equip HE, reload faster=win.

    As casual as it gets.

    Tl/dr=no skill, just like assault kit as of now.


    An Assault is no counter to a tank. 2-4 Assaults is a counter to a tank. So the balance already is in place. That is why nerfing the AT gadgets up close while not adjusting their long range capabilities (like giving them any) is idiotic. It is the same argument as with the rest of the 5.2 patch. They see a problem and try to solve it through directly buffing the issue.
    It should take 2/3/4 assaults to take out a medium/heavy tank. The fact assaults can solo a tank is THE problem at the moment.  Yes ranged AT weapons have shortish range, but you have mines/dynamite to sneak up on tanks and OHK with. I do like the idea of less damage but more range on AT weapons though as it would be a decent compromise.
  • wasp9166
    242 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited November 28
    hmmmmm, welp there is almost no chance of survival going into an objective on ps, too many hiding places for infantry 

    this all could have been addressed by just removing some bushes , is dice nasa?
  • jroggs
    703 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    edited November 28
    RIP Panzerfaust.

    RIP Support AT.

    Long live the unskilled tankers.

    I was really hoping this could shake up the meta so I didn't have to constantly run PIAT/ dynamite Assault every time I played infantry in a tank map. As much as you guys whine about the amount of Assaults running around, well, it's not fun only having one class that can remotely stand up to tanks instead of having to run away or die.
  • VincentNZ
    3499 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    VincentNZ said:
    VincentNZ said:
    What good are mines, if it can not kill with the three mines you get from topping off? What good are PFs if you can only deal 33 on a regular basis? Even if you think you can land a perfect shot, it is still inconsistent.
    And how is this going to help against playing the tanks optimally at 200m on a hill? The AT gadgets have an effective range of 50m and deal inconsistent damage, if they deal damage at all at further ranges. Also The further the tank is away the longer it will take to flank to get a good shot. And this will mean flanking into enemy territory. Let us take the optimal case for infantry: Twisted Steel on C. Tank is 30m away, a lot of cover. So if I want to get a rear angle, I have to do a quarter circle to get to the side and another 30m to get a good back angle. Not factoring in enemy or that the tank can see me. That is a movement of 70-80m just to get a perfect angle at close range. If you make the distance longer you can multiply that again.
    Instead they could have just removed angling, for AT gadgets, make it deal less damage overall, like 20 flat and make the AT gadgets work up to 100-150m, so you can actually inconvenience these hillcampers.
    Main counter to a tank should be another tank not assault. I think the new patch will force even more hillhump behaviour to camp because assaults are already the most used class in game. Even though mines have a damage drop off, disabling tracks means sure death.

    They have to tweak assault-tank relation and I think they went wrong all the way. Instead they "tweaked" tank vs tank battles :shoot first, hit first, equip HE, reload faster=win.

    As casual as it gets.

    Tl/dr=no skill, just like assault kit as of now.


    An Assault is no counter to a tank. 2-4 Assaults is a counter to a tank. So the balance already is in place. That is why nerfing the AT gadgets up close while not adjusting their long range capabilities (like giving them any) is idiotic. It is the same argument as with the rest of the 5.2 patch. They see a problem and try to solve it through directly buffing the issue.
    It should take 2/3/4 assaults to take out a medium/heavy tank. The fact assaults can solo a tank is THE problem at the moment.  Yes ranged AT weapons have shortish range, but you have mines/dynamite to sneak up on tanks and OHK with. I do like the idea of less damage but more range on AT weapons though as it would be a decent compromise.
    Yeah, I spend 10 seconds to deplete my 2/3 launchers, then I sneak up to a tank and throw down my 2-3 dynamites and then I might get 100 damage done, if instant repair was not a thing. And if the tanker is afk and not using 3rd person where he can see and hear me coming and if there is no enemy to back him up. If I kill a tank alone than he deserved to be blown up.
    Tanks already are only countered by Assault and mildly inconvenienced by supports. Let us say that support is not the least played class and that half the weapons used on it is not totally useless in aggressive action. So that is 50% of infantry running Assault or Support with the AT pistol/mines and each Assault runs PIAT AND Dynamite. And then I have to find two other unattritioned dudes to get rid of one guy that has clicked on an icon on the spawn screen, runs with 100% efficiency alone and that is not allowed to fight us back.
    On flags, absolutely possible to do. In between or with ranges longer than I'd say 40m, highly unlikely.
  • jroggs
    703 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    VincentNZ said:
    What good are mines, if it can not kill with the three mines you get from topping off? What good are PFs if you can only deal 33 on a regular basis? Even if you think you can land a perfect shot, it is still inconsistent.
    And how is this going to help against playing the tanks optimally at 200m on a hill? The AT gadgets have an effective range of 50m and deal inconsistent damage, if they deal damage at all at further ranges. Also The further the tank is away the longer it will take to flank to get a good shot. And this will mean flanking into enemy territory. Let us take the optimal case for infantry: Twisted Steel on C. Tank is 30m away, a lot of cover. So if I want to get a rear angle, I have to do a quarter circle to get to the side and another 30m to get a good back angle. Not factoring in enemy or that the tank can see me. That is a movement of 70-80m just to get a perfect angle at close range. If you make the distance longer you can multiply that again.
    Instead they could have just removed angling, for AT gadgets, make it deal less damage overall, like 20 flat and make the AT gadgets work up to 100-150m, so you can actually inconvenience these hillcampers.
    Main counter to a tank should be another tank not assault. I think the new patch will force even more hillhump behaviour to camp because assaults are already the most used class in game. Even though mines have a damage drop off, disabling tracks means sure death.

    They have to tweak assault-tank relation and I think they went wrong all the way. Instead they "tweaked" tank vs tank battles :shoot first, hit first, equip HE, reload faster=win.

    As casual as it gets.

    Tl/dr=no skill, just like assault kit as of now.


    Funny, "no skill" is exactly how I would describe tankers who cannot manage to use birds eye view to detect enemies or their one-hit kill weapons to ward off the players who have to sneak up right next to them and slowly deploy their mediocre-damage gadgets to have a chance to get a kill.
  • almothana11
    8 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Why are the AT mines nerfed? It is the only way any class other than assaults can kill tanks
    I've never heard any tanker or infantry player complain about them. They're not hard to spot (they are literally glowing in some maps or dark lightning) and they don't stick to the tank's body so all you have to do is just drive to the opposite direction.

  • VincentNZ
    3499 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Why are the AT mines nerfed? It is the only way any class other than assaults can kill tanks
    I've never heard any tanker or infantry player complain about them. They're not hard to spot (they are literally glowing in some maps or dark lightning) and they don't stick to the tank's body so all you have to do is just drive to the opposite direction.

    DICE thinks that Mines, used as a sub-par Dynamite are meta in a game, where support is the least played class, support has a lot of opportunity to choose sub-par weapon classes and especially gadgets.
    DICE also thinks that SMGs kill instantly at 100m, which is technically impossibly unless you choose a certain spec, where you give up the SMGs inherent niche, for a weapon that is still worse than everything else at range, and then they balance their game around this.
  • Trokey66
    8602 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    One of the issues isn't AT gadgets on an individual basis but their proliferation.

    Give one class with the best weapons all the AT gadgets and even if nerf'd into the ground individually, there will still be plenty available.

    Once upon a time, you used Assualt (Engineer) to specifically hunt or repair vehicles and generally speaking, their primaries were OK but not exceptional.

    Now, every one uses the class for the primaries and have an added bonus of smashing Tonks if they happen to come across one.
  • talhaONE
    224 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I dont get the turret hits also. Turrets are the most vulnerable parts of tanks, aside engines, high risk high reward principle. Hits to the turret unless angled or front, should be counted normal/critical. Basically if a tanker wants to camp behind an obstacle he will be better protected including his most exposed part.
    They are decreasing the damage to turret hits for rewarding hulldown play style i guess.
Sign In or Register to comment.