On 7/28/2020 at 3:53 AM, dfnce said:main base of players likes to play tank games like AW because of MBT-alike and these people want such vehicles to perform well in variety of aspects.
So because the majority of players enjoy playing MBTs, their performance should be emphasized/prioritized? That's not a particularly valid/convincing argument.
According to such logic, all other classes should remain inferior to MBTs largely in part due to their overwhelming popularity and accessibility. May as well remove/exclude all the other classes entirely then, since all of their roles can be effectively performed by MBTs (at least in their current form).
I knew several players who enjoyed playing lighter vehicles who quit AW simply because of the dominance of MBTs. I don't think it's particularly enjoyable to be forced to one class due to that specific class of vehicle(s) being far more effective on the battlefield.
On 7/28/2020 at 3:53 AM, dfnce said:Why not fix things like damage/armor/speed of certain OP premium vehicles, why not fix unfinish business with spotting, broken inversion or mortar infantry?
I mostly agree in these regards.
Note that extensive rebalancing is planned for some of your concerns in 0.33. @Silentstalker has already confirmed the CATTB will be seeing a nerf and the vehicle movement/mobility system is being overhauled as well.
However, I have no particular issue with mortar infantry. Sure, indirect fire is certainly annoying, but I would rank AT squads far more dangerous and/or troublesome (especially T9-10 HEAT-MP).
Improvements to spotting and incentives for assisting damage would definitely be greatly appreciated though.
On 7/28/2020 at 3:53 AM, dfnce said:And why random MBT player should depend on another random AFV player in matters of spotting?
I don't think it's a matter of reliance on other classes, but a matter of balancing overall vehicle capabilities.
MBTs should be able to spot their own targets, but only if they actively approach them. Their armor and increased HP pools allow/afford them to push towards the opposition. Consequently, their view range(s) should be far less than those of AFVs and LTs, whose greater view range(s) should allow them to employ active or passive vision control because they have far less protection compared to MBTs.
As much as I hate to reference WoT, their dynamic between HTs, MTs, and LTs is far more balanced (ignoring TDs and SPGs). All classes have their strengths and weaknesses, which are reflected in their defined specializations/roles.
A WoT heavy's vision pales in comparison to a light because heavies are far better armored and are intended to take fire. Does this mean heavy tanks must rely on light/medium tanks to spot targets and do damage? No.
However, this "encourages" heavies to push forward to find (and deal damage to) targets; whereas lights (and some mediums) can passively spot enemies pushing and/or overextending (hopefully without being detected themselves) due to their smaller size and to compensate for their far thinner armor.
MBTs should not be the be-all and end-all of classes in AW. Although they may reign superior while serving with the armies of the world, their capabilities should be equalized in-game.