Playing around with tank concepts

[delsy]

I haven't given every tank I've unlocked full attention of play, but of those I have, I've found that I enjoy playing those whose trigger and loadout designs have a certain unity of purpose. As long as I have a course of action, I'll enjoy following it even where it's less viable. This is made especially possible by loot being independent of damage performance.

Like:
Silver: Bland but dependable.
Corsair: Keep your face to the enemy. Good survivability and monstrous offensive triggers.
Phantom: Get in there.
Predator: Run straight in and use 4+1 for your second wind. 4+3 also combines nicely. Triggers recharge quickly.
Trailblazer: Get scouting yo.

Don't like:
Avenger: Sort of. Triggers work well with its fragility and it's nice for convoys. It just isn't really my bag though.
Hercules: I don't mind low DPS and enjoy the two bomb triggers. But I don't feel like paralyze and heal over time do much for it, and I believe that a single shield is a disadvantage when you want to get in the thick of things. Herc got one heck of a buff.

July 14 2013:It seems Hornet's lightning reaches further and wider than I was aware. Maybe a new build changed it. Also the new Zeta Complex give some use to Hornet's damage and range. So, what follows may be outdated.

I'll start with a closer look at the Hornet. Sniping without some close-up viability feels out of place in Grid. You need to close distance or eliminate minions to get a clear shot at fortresses. Or you could give a tank long range and high damage to take care of the minions quickly, but that could encourage sedentary play. So you might shorten regular range below fortress gun and minion aggro range, bogging down the Hornet's ranged game. So the Hornet must occasionally charge structures and occupy minions with its rear shields. You now have a tank with a low rate of fire and little use for its range. All the finagling needed to make extreme range "balanced" just ends up making other tanks more desirable. I may be oversimplifying.

I've taken to using the blink trigger offensively for the heck of it. After attracting the attention of minions and turrets, I turn, use the lightning trigger and blink over to the exposed side. I sort of doubt this was an intended strategy. Not much advantage because you're sacrificing damage while you're turned away. But what if the Hornet were reworked with less focus on sniping and more on... stinging? (arg, so lame)

Triggers
1: Same backwards blink, medium cooldown
2: Longer forward blink, medium cooldown
3: Cloak, longer cooldown
4: Three bursts of aft lightning in as many seconds. Short range, multiple targets. Short cooldown. Extra damage if any shields are down?

Well, this is like something I could enjoy playing around with, but what do you think?

I'll be kicking ideas around for other tanks.

[delsy]

Actually, Blink-Heavy is a concept that deserves a whole other tank. After playing Hornet a little more, I've decided that what really bothers me is that aft lightning is such a concession to doing a very un-sniperish things: either turning your back to and your main gun away from your target, or moving in close enough that you put a minion behind yourself to hit with the lightning. And doesn't even do so good a job of that, with its single target and short range. It's fun to get a chance to use it, but it isn't worth much no matter the playstyle.

So how about replacing it with a burst that locks enemy steering and velocity for a few seconds? Go in, use it, blink backwards, and snipe while all the minions move obligingly out of the way if you time things right. You could even sneak a clever reference to rubberbanding into the lore.

[delsy]

Time for me to keep talking to myself.

I've been wondering lately about tank design philosophy. In designing a tank, what limits and possibilities are we working with? How far beyond current the framework is it sensible to extend, and how will doing so affect things that were created under older criteria? The concepts in gingerbear's idea thread below look quite fun, but some ideas have no precedent in current tanks (this is not a bad thing), and I wonder if they have a place in the devs' vision of Grid.

grid12.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=gotonewpost&board=general&thread=218

Opinion follows below:

The most important idea is the sacrifice of movement, damage, or shields. So far, triggers are freebies. You likely have to put yourself at some risk to use one, but it will never negatively affect your tank. What if the Crustacean were added, which can sacrifice its inner shields to regenerate its outer? Well, that could take three routes I'm aware of.

1. Keep the old standard and simply have the trigger regenerate the outer shield for free. Roughly the same effect and in keeping with the standard, though some of the original concept is lost in the process. Easy.
2. Introduce a cost of some sort for shield regen to all tanks. Sacrificing damage, speed, etc. and making shield regen startup triggers free, for example. Much thought and rebalancing involved.
3. Balance Crusty against the other tanks and keep its unique regen trigger. Easy.

It's certainly polarizing of me to say that 1 or 2 are the only good options, but something about 3 makes me hiss a little inside. Maybe because 1 is just so much more practical. Yet I believe 1 will prove to be very limiting for tank design in the future. I remember reading that the future array of tanks will be akin to League of Legends, and I wonder how meaningful such variety will be if tank design remains as it is.

[kyks]

seems very cool maybe i can help you with some tanks you havent unlocked yet/not tested yet just call me on the IRC and iam ready to help