Jump to content
Haswell

In Development: 2T Stalker

Recommended Posts

https://aw.my.games/en/news/general/development-2t-stalker

Quote

As we’ve announced already, there is a new set of Contract Mission coming in Update 0.33 along with a brand-new reward vehicle, the Belarusian 2T Stalker Tier 8 Premium AFV (this vehicle was previously announced as a Tier 9 one, but its parameters have since been adjusted). Today, we’d like to tell you a bit more about it.

...

As we mentioned already, in Armored Warfare, the 2T Stalker will be a Tier 8 Premium Armored Fighting Vehicle, available as a reward for the next set of Contract Missions. As the description above suggests, it’s going to be a rather stealthy, if large, vehicle but before we take things any further, here’s the thing. We haven’t really balanced it for the upcoming Tier 7-10 changes yet, so everything written here is very much a work in progress, more so than usual. It’s very likely that the characteristics will change, although this text should give you an idea what we are aiming at.

With that being said, let’s start with this vehicle’s protection – or the lack of, because the Stalker will be, despite its size and weight (27 tons), only resistant against bullets. Autocannon rounds will likely go right through (except for ricochets). There will not be any hard-kill APS either; the whole vehicle will be very vulnerable. But armor’s not really what this AFV will be about anyway.

 

The firepower will not be bad though. We’re talking about a single 30mm autocannon and an Ataka ATGM launcher with two tubes, some 850mm of penetration and tandem HEAT warheads.

Now, you may be thinking that this isn’t right since the screenshots clearly show two double launchers. The situation here is more complicated though. As we mentioned before, in real life, one of these launchers belongs to a short-range SAM system. The thing is, we don’t have airplanes in Armored Warfare, so we originally thought to replace the SAM launcher with another Ataka ATGM one and have the vehicle fire four missiles before fully reloading, not just two. After some discussions, however, we realized that combined with the excellent stealth and mobility this vehicle offers, it might be a bit too much, which is why we are now thinking of leaving only one ATGM launcher available, the way it was in reality. Which solution would you prefer and why? Let us know on Discord!

 

One other special characteristic of sorts can also be divined from the attached screenshots. As you can see, the launchers are elevated far above the actual hull of the vehicle. In game terms, you’ll be able to fire at enemy targets using your ATGMs even when your entire vehicle is hidden behind an obstacle. This will be, however, quite tricky to pull off and the damage over time dealt this way will not be high due to the longer reload time of the missiles.

The ATGM firepower will be possible to enhance with an additional progression module, allowing you to have one more missile in the air as well as faster reload time. Another firepower-related additional progression module will offer better autocannon ammunition, although, generally speaking, the autocannon damage output will be lower than on other AFVs or TDs (such as the BMPT Mod.2000).

So far, we have mediocre firepower and very poor protection but not to worry, things will get better from now on.

 

For one, the vehicle will be very agile and fast. We’re talking some serious acceleration and hull traverse because, after all, this is supposed to be a recon vehicle. But the Stalker will also be quite stealthy and will have excellent viewrange. Its basic camouflage factor will be around 36% and the basic viewrange will be around 430 meters. The latter parameter will be possible to boost via the Radar active ability. This ability will increase the viewrange parameters to whopping 475 meters, but only when the vehicle is standing still and, at the same time, it will reduce the camouflage factor by 5%. It’s also worth noting that this ability too will only be available via additional progression.

 

In summation, what we have here is a relatively fragile recon vehicle (although not as fragile as various four-wheeled vehicles) with good camouflage, excellent viewrange and great mobility. As such, it’ll be capable of both active spotting (moving in front of your team to spot enemies and retreating upon contact) and passive spotting (finding a good position with cover and staying there, not drawing attention to yourself). In combat, the Stalker will be able to set up ambushes and deal with enemy active scouts rather effectively, but head to head combat with MBTs is definitely not advised, the Stalker does not carry enough firepower or armor to be successful in that regard.

I was really looking forward to the Stalker being tier 9, but I guess that would make the Hunter too irrelevant and hurt the sales.

One way to balance 4 missiles at tier 8 would be to simply not use Ataka missiles. Lower the alpha so that it is comparable to the Ingwe and call it Shturm, that way it wouldn't be out of place since the Stalker IRL can use both Ataka and Shturm missiles. Alternatively keep them as Ataka missiles, but give the launchers horrible elevation/depression similar to the Mephisto (but don't give it autohoming), that way it will be balanced by player skill similar to the Mephisto and VBL Ingwe.

I'm not fond of contract reward vehicles having their overprogression gated behind contract missions, since it will mean many weeks if not months before anyone will be able to play the vehicles to their true potential. The PSP for example goes from meh to one of the best gun-based squishies at tier 7 after the reload module is unlocked. This is just tedious and needlessly grindy, but I guess that's the entire point of the stupid overprogression system? Playing into the sunk cost fallacy in existing players to keep them engaged in the game. Ethically horrible but somehow acceptable in business.


Spoiler

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm just not really excited about yet another low-dpm-no-armor PvP vehicle, to be honest. We've got SO many of those.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Still better than yet another armored hulk promoting the awful armor + DPM meta. Careful vision control is something I enjoy more than simply mushing my face into red things.

I mean, how bad could the DPM be with an autocannon? Even if it's BMD-2M levels of alpha it would be sufficient, but who knows what the 0.33 rebalancing will shake up?


Spoiler

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Haswell said:

I mean, how bad could the DPM be with an autocannon?

That's what I tought aswell. I mean as long as it has an AC it is usually already set to be performing well in PVE. Other than that it sounds interesting, wonder how easy it will be to abuse the "fire behind cover" tactics.


Spoiler

fdassdaas.jpg.c709df3e98adc5265f232fe9458a3043.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

the Stalker also carried 12 anti-tank mines to lay down ambushes

Hmm, minelaying would be an interesting new mechanic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Haswell said:

Still better than yet another armored hulk promoting the awful armor + DPM meta. Careful vision control is something I enjoy more than simply mushing my face into red things.

I mean, how bad could the DPM be with an autocannon? Even if it's BMD-2M levels of alpha it would be sufficient, but who knows what the 0.33 rebalancing will shake up?

At tier 8, some autoguns are pretty sparse in the DPM department, and they wreck your cammo really bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some gameplay footage of the Stalker, they are going for the 2 missile config I guess. The launcher looks like it has fairly poor elevation and depression angles, and it has a long reload animation.

So it's basically a Mephisto, but with a dakka and two fewer missiles without autohoming. Solidly meh at first glance.

 


Spoiler

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/22/2020 at 9:57 AM, JintoLin said:

How about they fix current mechanics before they add new ones.

WE HAVE THE A WINNER!


 

"If you were not birthed with claws or fangs, store bought will do just fine."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/22/2020 at 12:53 PM, Zardas said:

Hmm, minelaying would be an interesting new mechanic.

We considered it and even tested it at one point. If was either useless or incredibly annoying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd suspect "useless" in almost all cases, although there's a few maps with tight enough funnels that it could be super-obnoxious.  

 

I personally would like to see it retain the SAMs.  Specifically, I'd like it to keep the SAM, with the missile carrying a HE-mechanic warhead, but perhaps called something different.  The warhead would have enormous alpha, 5k or so, so that it will absolutely decimate helicopters, drones, ACs and the like... but it will have only about 5mm of pen, and extremely little or no spalling, in order to best simulate a high-shrapnel warhead design with a proximity or super-quick nose fuse. It would wipe out infantry as well as a 152mm HE shell, but would do very little damage to even lightly armored vehicles like the missile jeeps, and none what-so-ever to anything with armor rated for fragmentation or small-arms protection.  

 

I think it'd be kind of cool, since that would be something that would not require any new mechanics, working within the existing HE mechanic, and would be totally unique to the game.  Limited use, yes, but we have many very niche vehicles right now, and it would still retain all of the listed abilities for ground combat.  Just gain a unique mechanic that nothing else has.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/24/2020 at 9:07 PM, Haswell said:

... Solidly meh at first glance.

Thank all the Tanking Gods for that one. With any luck they'll have learned their lesson from last time, and the time before that, and the time before that....

... oh, who am I kidding, it'll somehow be OP as fuck.

 


"Yog-Sothoth knows the gate. Yog-Sothoth is the gate. Yog-Sothoth is the key and guardian of the gate. Past, present, future, all are one in Yog-Sothoth."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Lenticulas said:

Thank all the Tanking Gods for that one. With any luck they'll have learned their lesson from last time, and the time before that, and the time before that....

... oh, who am I kidding, it'll somehow be OP as fuck.

 

Just out of curiosity. Let's assume that it won't be the case and the Stalker will be perfectly balanced. Which is something elite PvP players (aka 1-5 percent of playerbase, depending on what metrics you use) will appreciate, but for everyone else, it will be more like "meh why bother, we already better vehicles in the game."

How will you make it attractive to other players?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Silentstalker said:

Let's assume that it won't be the case and the Stalker will be perfectly balanced.

SS,

This is where the issue lies.  There is, based on what all the devs in any game like this says, a base line that says for this thing at that level this is where it should be at performance wise.  It is already assumed that any other vehicle is "perfectly balanced" prior to release but when put to the test that isn't the case. 

 

55 minutes ago, Silentstalker said:

"meh why bother, we already better vehicles in the game."

It's true.  Why would one want to buy another vehicle that gets power crept or nerfed after the fact due to it not actually being balanced when it is put to the test.  Most developers such as AW's don't want to mess with a premium vehicle due to the back lash that is caused and hurt sales  If this is going to be part of the new contract mission, it's stuff I'll do anyways so if I get it I get it great.  But if after 5 or 6 battles in it if it's ~meh~ then it'll collect dust.

 

59 minutes ago, Silentstalker said:

How will you make it attractive to other players?

There in lies the rub.  If it is balanced but it is an under-performer compared to other similiar vehicles at that time, then who would want it.  If it over performs then it pushes everything else out of the way then when it comes time to fix it you face the back lash.  This is not a position I would envy you to be in.

 

I'd love to do more PvP but prime time for AW is after I get home from work/gym and get settled down to want to play AW and there are some others in the same position.  If you add in that there are people that do not want to do any sort of PvP that creates a larger issue.  That causes an issue with what your definition of balance is, my definition of balance, and anyone elses definition is.  They don't meet up in the right place.  The Stalker is a prime example.


 

"If you were not birthed with claws or fangs, store bought will do just fine."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

 

2 hours ago, Silentstalker said:

Just out of curiosity. Let's assume that it won't be the case and the Stalker will be perfectly balanced. Which is something elite PvP players (aka 1-5 percent of playerbase, depending on what metrics you use) will appreciate, but for everyone else, it will be more like "meh why bother, we already better vehicles in the game."

How will you make it attractive to other players?

I thought, a long long time ago, the idea of AW premium vehicles was they wouldn't be OP or anything like that, but they'd just be like a regular progression vehicle, but since it was a Premium, it would shower the owner with Credits. Like the terminator sapphire or whatever.

Of course the premium tanks at that time pretty much were all actual progression vehicles, plus a few others. That was one of the things that I thought was a really good idea: you could get an advantage out of a Premium, without anyone screaming "pay to win".

Now the situation seems to have changed a bit, am I right? I can see with the newest crop of Premiums, even if they are sometimes also available through the BP, they do tend to be OP. I only have to look at the results screen of an average glops match, to see all the Prems occupying the top positions.

I'm not denying those Prems might have very talented players in them, but the best players aren't stupid, and they won't be picking tanks because they are terrible vehicles that you can't win with. And also some of the top players I've seen have a couple of Billion credits, so they aren't in a Prem for the money.

Addressing power creep as you are doing now, that's a good thing, you only need to do that, because it becomes a problem... You know you're going to end up in the same situation.... Right?

Anyway, enough from me.

PS. Oh and this Stalker, its special feature... It's not going to be... "Silent" is it ;->

 

Edited by Lenticulas
Consulting the Infernal Powers (see edit history)

"Yog-Sothoth knows the gate. Yog-Sothoth is the gate. Yog-Sothoth is the key and guardian of the gate. Past, present, future, all are one in Yog-Sothoth."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This doesn't actually answer the question, though - Why would someone pay money, or spend the inordinate amounts of time required to get the battle path premiums, to acquire a tank that is no different or better than one they can get for far less effort?  These have to be marketable or desirable as well, which means they have to have some kind of selling point.  "Here, have this Bradley with a different model" isn't really all that special or desirable.  Rather, it might be for a small handful of collectors, but not the wide base of players you need to make money with a premium tank.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Komitadjie said:

This doesn't actually answer the question, though - Why would someone pay money, or spend the inordinate amounts of time required to get the battle path premiums, to acquire a tank that is no different or better than one they can get for far less effort?  These have to be marketable or desirable as well, which means they have to have some kind of selling point.  "Here, have this Bradley with a different model" isn't really all that special or desirable.  Rather, it might be for a small handful of collectors, but not the wide base of players you need to make money with a premium tank.  

As Lenticulas said, the pitch for Premium vehicles back in the day was that they were slightly less powerful than a fully-kitted progression vehicle of the same tier, but provided significant extra credits.  You laid out cash for a Premium vehicle for the extra credits it helped you earn.  You might (read: probably would) want several of them so that you could a) get the daily 2x more than once, and b) have different Premiums for different maps.

My first 2 Premium vehicle purchases (at least as far as I remember) were a Tier 6 VFM Mk 5 and a Tier 8 AMX-10RCR.  Neither one of them was ever OP, and in fact they were both pretty meh.  But those sweet, sweet credits kept me playing them.  The AMX is still to this day my most played vehicle, because I used it constantly to earn credits to buy all of the Tier 9s and 10s as I was grinding.  Even the VFM was in my top 5 for the longest time, though I think it's finally been pushed out due to the extra-long grinds of some of the more recent progression vehicles.

I still prefer to play Premium vehicles whenever possible even though I have 800M credits saved up.  For a PvE player, the credit grind is crazy in this game if you're just playing along and not perfectly stacking boosts and insignias.  So even with a fat back account, I still feel the need to earn as much as I can at all times.  Ergo, premiums.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, the problem there is that it doesn't encourage ever buying more than just one or two premiums at most.  If all it does is let you farm a bit better, all you need is one good farming vehicle.  That's not a particularly useful marketing strategy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Except that then you find out that most of them are pretty fun to play, too, and so you end up buying a bunch of them so that you have the right vehicle for every map/situation.

I mean, sure, I started out slowly with just the VFM and then the RCR, but I kept buying more and more as interesting alternatives popped up.  Now I have like 10+ each at Tier 6 (for max Tier PvE) and Tier 8 (for Spec Ops), and like 4-5 at Tier 10.  All told I think I have around 50, but a lot of those are low tier that were pretty close to free (and often actually were free).

There's basically no reason to play a progression vehicle once you've progressed past it, unless it is OPAF.  At least Premiums give you extra credits and so are an occasional enticement (at least for me) to play lower tiers.

Note: that's all "the theory" of how they were supposed to work.  Due to OPAF Premiums like the BMPT Model 2017, and the added credit bonus on the Object 640, there's little reason to play anything else in PvE other than grinding for progression.  Any time I'm "caught up" in the current environment, I default to those two until something new comes out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I thought you might like a fair chance say what the actual situation, is rather than me jumping to conclusions, or putting words in your mouth.

So, just to get this absolutely clear, is this: you two, @Silentstalker & @Komitadjie  …..Official representatives of AW/My.com,... are you/are you not saying:

"there's no way we can sell Premiums unless they're OP, it's 'pay-to-win' from now on"?

 

----------------------------------------------------------------

re: glops & i suppose pvp as well.
Personally I don't really care if people have pay-to-win vehicles; the problem is, as I'm pretty sure you know, that AW is a zero-sum game.

That is: when one guy in a pay-to-win tank wins, another guy in a normal tank MUST LOSE. There is just no way round it.

So what does this mean to me? Shall I grind hundreds of hours maybe, to get a fantastic Tier 10 Challenger ADTU, and then what?
I don't want to find out that I'll be forced to eat repeated losses, so the Black Eagle/Type 10 owners can have their ... wins at my expense? That doesn't sound like a great gaming experience, sorry.
Someone else's paid-for-fun, becomes them paying for me to not have fun..


And also: where does this leave people who bought old-style premiums with real life money: A Challenger Fionn/Wiesel HOT wolf?
now (their skinned progression style) Premiums are just Second Class? They paid real money for those.

And to a similar, but lesser extent: battle-hardened vehicles.

Edited by Lenticulas (see edit history)

"Yog-Sothoth knows the gate. Yog-Sothoth is the gate. Yog-Sothoth is the key and guardian of the gate. Past, present, future, all are one in Yog-Sothoth."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Lenticulas said:

Official representatives of AW/My.com

Just to stop the dumpster fire from starting, keep in mind that official game staff are here on the forum in an unofficial capacity unless they state otherwise. Same goes for anything they say, it would simply be their personal opinion unless they indicate differently.

Think of it as bumping into your landlord or local management at a pub, they are there to chitchat with people and enjoy themselves just like you and I do. Don't grill or harass them, treat them as you would want to be treated yourself.

 

23 hours ago, Silentstalker said:

Just out of curiosity. Let's assume that it won't be the case and the Stalker will be perfectly balanced. Which is something elite PvP players (aka 1-5 percent of playerbase, depending on what metrics you use) will appreciate, but for everyone else, it will be more like "meh why bother, we already better vehicles in the game."

How will you make it attractive to other players?

I have very little experience in PvP, so I'll comment only on the PvE aspect here. And since we don't really have any details for the 0.33 rebalance yet I'll base my comments on the current meta instead.

The tier 8 squishy dakka meta right now includes the K21, Marder, Griffin and Bradley. K21 and Marder are damage incarnates, Griffin specializes in high consistent damage over time and great stationary camo, Bradley kind of just derps around. All of them are fairly adept at vision control (except for the Marder, but it's also not bad) with very decent damage output, with moderate mobility.

The Stalker could fill the niche of having high mobility and great vision control (but not necessarily both view range and camo at the same time), at the cost of comparatively lower damage output (think BMD-2M levels), which is basically what the article suggested. The hard part would be how to balance it as to not make the VBR completely redundant, since the VBR already do the same things at the cost of having wheels instead of tracks. The obvious way would be to simply let the Stalker have slightly lower vision control capabilities, lower total view range and camo for example, but still higher than the other tracked AFVs.

Admittedly this sort of low damage output, high vision control playstyle wouldn't necessarily be friendly or easy for inexperienced players, nor applicable in every map. This may decrease the appeal of the Stalker to the average player, but likely no worse than the VBR already does.

Rosomak is a turd who's only saving grace is the autohoming missiles, so I won't even try to compare it.


Spoiler

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Haswell said:

Just to stop the dumpster fire from starting, keep in mind that official game staff are here on the forum in an unofficial capacity unless they state otherwise. Same goes for anything they say, it would simply be their personal opinion unless they indicate differently.

Think of it as bumping into your landlord or local management at a pub, they are there to chitchat with people and enjoy themselves just like you and I do. Don't grill or harass them, treat them as you would want to be treated yourself.

They can answer or not, or can tag their answer as 'official' or 'just their opinion', whatever they want. I dont intend to harass them - it's just they are the only people i can ask.

 

Actually just forget it.

Edited by Lenticulas (see edit history)

"Yog-Sothoth knows the gate. Yog-Sothoth is the gate. Yog-Sothoth is the key and guardian of the gate. Past, present, future, all are one in Yog-Sothoth."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/2/2020 at 2:53 PM, Katsumoto said:

This is where the issue lies.  There is, based on what all the devs in any game like this says, a base line that says for this thing at that level this is where it should be at performance wise.  It is already assumed that any other vehicle is "perfectly balanced" prior to release but when put to the test that isn't the case. 

Let's just assume it means what it means to you. There's no point in defining every single term and, quite frankly, it's not necessary for this topic.

 

On 8/2/2020 at 2:53 PM, Katsumoto said:

It's true.  Why would one want to buy another vehicle that gets power crept or nerfed after the fact due to it not actually being balanced when it is put to the test.  Most developers such as AW's don't want to mess with a premium vehicle due to the back lash that is caused and hurt sales  If this is going to be part of the new contract mission, it's stuff I'll do anyways so if I get it I get it great.  But if after 5 or 6 battles in it if it's ~meh~ then it'll collect dust.

But the vehicle is still not free. You pay either with your time or with your money (gold can be a sub-group of both). But let's assume this is a sales premium, the question stays the same.

23 hours ago, Lenticulas said:

I thought, a long long time ago, the idea of AW premium vehicles was they wouldn't be OP or anything like that, but they'd just be like a regular progression vehicle, but since it was a Premium, it would shower the owner with Credits. Like the terminator sapphire or whatever.

Of course the premium tanks at that time pretty much were all actual progression vehicles, plus a few others. That was one of the things that I thought was a really good idea: you could get an advantage out of a Premium, without anyone screaming "pay to win".

Now the situation seems to have changed a bit, am I right?

Well, no. This problem actually concerns all newly introduced vehicles, be it premium, progression or obtainable otherwise. The new progression machines suffered from the same problems (eg. being powercreeped). If a new premium vehicle was introduced on the level of the vehicles from 2015/2016, it would be significantly inferior to the new progression vehicles. So are new premiums better than old progression vehicles? Yes. Are new progression vehicles better than old premiums? Yes, significantly. Another problem that compounds the issue is that the "credit printer" argument is no longer valid except for new players, which we do have, but it's very different from the 2015 where EVERYONE was new. Most veterans effectively have unlimited credits and/or obscene amounts of gold. So the need to make premium vehicles attractive by other means than just presenting them as credit printers is obvious. Especially when you have nothing to spend the credits on (all new premium vehicles are effectively unlocked on day 1 by veteran players, which is obviously not a desired state).

 

23 hours ago, Lenticulas said:

 

Addressing power creep as you are doing now, that's a good thing, you only need to do that, because it becomes a problem... You know you're going to end up in the same situation.... Right?

Eventually, if nothing changes, yes. That is a way many games do it. They gradually powercreep (the trick is to make this manageable by powercreeping only slightly, it's called the salami method). Then they either make a BIG RESET (aka 0.33 rebalance) or introduce new "tiers" (typical for World of Warcraft where DLC1 top gear suddenly was inferior to DLC2 basic gear and so on).

 

14 hours ago, knutliott said:

 

I still prefer to play Premium vehicles whenever possible even though I have 800M credits saved up.  For a PvE player, the credit grind is crazy in this game if you're just playing along and not perfectly stacking boosts and insignias.  So even with a fat back account, I still feel the need to earn as much as I can at all times.  Ergo, premiums.

I'd disagree here. From the statistics, IIRC, it takes about 4 months to get a Tier 10 vehicle without grinding like crazy or paying (you have to add all sorts of stuff to the equation, for example the regular weekly bonuses which we don't even often announce anymore). Compare that to WoT or even WT (without paying) and you'll find AW being easier by an order of magnitude to the point of it being detrimental (players skip low tiers in PvP so quickly the queue has problems and T1-T3 bots have to step in).

3 hours ago, Lenticulas said:

Official representatives of AW/My.com,... are you/are you not saying:

"there's no way we can sell Premiums unless they're OP, it's 'pay-to-win' from now on"?

Like Haswell says, I am not here on official capacity, more like a player interested in some discussions. But no. I think there are other ways. Not that I want to describe them in detail because some ideas weren't accepted by the production, some even depend on you not knowing. Nothing shady. Just different and considerably more difficult than just spamming lootboxes.

2 hours ago, Haswell said:

I have very little experience in PvP, so I'll comment only on the PvE aspect here. And since we don't really have any details for the 0.33 rebalance yet I'll base my comments on the current meta instead.

The tier 8 squishy dakka meta right now includes the K21, Marder, Griffin and Bradley. K21 and Marder are damage incarnates, Griffin specializes in high consistent damage over time and great stationary camo, Bradley kind of just derps around. All of them are fairly adept at vision control (except for the Marder, but it's also not bad) with very decent damage output, with moderate mobility.

The Stalker could fill the niche of having high mobility and great vision control (but not necessarily both view range and camo at the same time), at the cost of comparatively lower damage output (think BMD-2M levels), which is basically what the article suggested. The hard part would be how to balance it as to not make the VBR completely redundant, since the VBR already do the same things at the cost of having wheels instead of tracks. The obvious way would be to simply let the Stalker have slightly lower vision control capabilities, lower total view range and camo for example, but still higher than the other tracked AFVs.

Admittedly this sort of low damage output, high vision control playstyle wouldn't necessarily be friendly or easy for inexperienced players, nor applicable in every map. This may decrease the appeal of the Stalker to the average player, but likely no worse than the VBR already does.

Rosomak is a turd who's only saving grace is the autohoming missiles, so I won't even try to compare it.

Alright, but that's still not a system solution. I described the problem above and I will generalize it even more:

Let's assume you have a perfectly balanced premium that's not stronger than other vehicles. For everyone, it will be more like "meh why bother, we already better vehicles in the game."How will you make it attractive to players so they buy it?

And to make things clear - assume being a "fair developer" (playing the "good guy" card, CDPR style) is not going to work (certainly for AW, even if we are saints, even if you sell the project off to a guy who works charity by day and saves puppies from shelters by night, we'll always get caught by the past actions so there's no point in trying).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...