Name one thing in tanki that had the biggest nerf (with reason)

[DieselPlatinum 5,121]

wat.

 

Viking is the fastest of all mediums, and since it's faster than M0 Hornet at the M3 level I'd say it's a mixture of a light and medium.

Explain why Hunter doesn't need stability. If it didn't have stability it would have no redeeming factors whatsoever (no speed, no stability, same HP as the rest of the mediums).

Second, explain why Viking needs stability, and what drugging has anything to do with the stability of a hull.

 

Also the roles of Viking and Hunter were switched in 2016 re-balance . . . so you can't really apply the old logic when comparing them. All mediums have same HP. Viking is fast and Hunter is stable. This is the current meta.

I argue that speed is more important than stability (when we are dealing with same HP hulls) for medium hulls, because you can reposition quickly, run away from enemies, catch up to enemies, etc. You are more flexible on the battlefield and can perform multiple roles. This is the role of a medium.

Power and stability are good for hulls that defend flags or CP points, so that they can push enemies away while not being pushed around themselves. Consequentially such hulls have worse speed, but it isn't so important because they generally spend their time in one area. Because they spend so much time in one area and don't have to mobility to avoid fire, they are compensated with armor. This is the principle of heavy tanks.

Hunter falls into that weird gap where it has the power of a heavy and HP of a medium, but below average speed. Thus, it can't fulfill the role of a heavy, which requires HP, and can't fulfill the role of a medium, which requires speed. What is it good for then? Perhaps it is a good gun platform, because it doesn't suffer from impact force as much as Viking. But that isn't something that makes it OP, just more pleasant to play.

Hunter does not need stability because it's frame already makes it difficult to knock off its aim. The stability just makes it nearly impossible to do so, and even if they managed to do it, Hunter has the second fastest turning speed.

 

Viking needs the stability because it has more spots that an impact gun can hit front, sides, back, top, bottom, especially those corners. Speed is useless for Viking. The only turrets that might benefit from it are firebird, freeze, and isida. But the other turrets will not do well with Viking unless they drug, this is because every shot counts.

 

Speed is not everything. And if it is, then why not remove "hunters stability" and give it speed too, and same thing with dictator? See where your logic makes less sense than a child?

[ThirdOnion 4,898]

Hunter does not need stability because it's frame already makes it difficult to knock off its aim. The stability just makes it nearly impossible to do so, and even if they managed to do it, Hunter has the second fastest turning speed.

 

Viking needs the stability because it has more spots that an impact gun can hit front, sides, back, top, bottom, especially those corners. Speed is useless for Viking. The only turrets that might benefit from it are firebird, freeze, and isida. But the other turrets will not do well with Viking unless they drug, this is because every shot counts.

 

Speed is not everything. And if it is, then why not remove "hunters stability" and give it speed too, and same thing with dictator? See where your logic makes less sense than a child?

First, I said nothing about adding extra stability to Hunter.

Second, why is difficulty in knocking off someone's aim such a big deal? This is not something that makes a hull OP by any stretch of the imagination. Whether you knock of their aim or not, Hunter will still take damage. You destroy tanks with damage, not impact force. Most of the time players do not concentrate on knocking off someone's aim, and when they do, it seriously affects only turrets such as Railgun, Shaft, Striker, and Magnum.

Third, why do other turrets not do well with Viking? Any turret that needs to relocate frequently goes well with Viking. Examples: Smoky, Firebird, Freeze, Isida, Thunder, Hammer, Twins, Ricochet. All of these turrets have a dynamic play style that requires some mobility (although Twins is arguably better in the defensive role, it can be pretty aggressive too). I guess speed is useless for Hornet and Wasp too? What kind of logic is this? Speed is not everything, but speed still means a lot. A Hunter cannot run away. It can't chase after enemies. Both of these things can cost the player their tank or a flag. On the subject of other turrets, why do they have to drug? I don't get it. Is it because their aim is easily knocked off? Unless you play Railgun in an attacking role, it's not so easy to hit a camper to begin with.

Fourth: no one said anything about removing Hunter's stability. It is lacking HP, as I pretty clearly said in my previous post. It is suited well for a "heavium" role, mix of heavy and medium, but doesn't have the HP to do so.

 

To summarize, here is my point: because Viking is faster, it is more suited for aggressive play (I don't think one can argue about this). Hunter is more suited for defensive or supporting play, because it is more stable and doesn't have the speed to be aggressive. However, it is lacking in this department as well, because defensive hulls require at least some HP to be competitive. This is why I think Hunter is somewhat under-powered.