So I was most-way through a lengthy write-up on all things V and AV and decided to delete it. I will post the highlights though mainly because I like the conversation more than believe DUST has a real future.

Caldari philosophy - these guys are all about the bottom line, they want stuff that performs top tier, but they cut the corners so they only live up to expectations when used skillfully.

Gallente philosophy - they "focus" on omni-performance, in their efforts to shore up weaknesses, they only have the advantage when they can engage outside of their opponents' strengths.

Amarr philosophy - imposing and enlightened, amarr vehicles can be summed up as "floating bricks", they favor laser and missile recoiless weaponry to compensate for their lack of traction.

Minmitar philosophy - brutal simplicity, stripped of all but the barest essentials, even their HAV is little more than an oversized buggy, speed and aggression is everything since they cannot win a contest of endurance.

HAVs - the support vehicle, large, imposing, dangerous, your ball breakers and your anchors, very vulnerable in CQC with infantry.

LAVs - flanker and harassment, quick, nimble, they swoop in to tip the balance in infantry fights, must be coordinated or lucky to bring down HAVs or turrets.

DSs - logistics, they bring stuff from point A to point B direct, occasionally provides a little rain, optionally brings ammo, spawns, or fit swapping to an otherwise stranded squad or vehicle.

Some specifics of the big changes:

Costs start at 50k (fully fit militia) to 300k (fully fit prototype) using typical gear

All HAVs lose the top small turret, drivers occupy that seat but cannot aim large turret

Small turrets act like handheld weapon analogs with slightly tweaked magazines but similar range and damage profiles

Large turrets have roughly 5x the optimal range and 1.5x the damage of infantry weapons

Sica, Gunloggi, etc - main turret limited to 120-¦ arc, forward shields have innate 50% resists, rear armor so weak even ARs can seriously threaten it

Soma, Madruger, etc - no rear or undercarriage weak point, very good torque, can ignore almost all small arm fire, least vulnerable to infantry of HAV class

Small rails do full damage to vehicles, large rail has optimal of 100, effective of 400, ultimate of 650 (compared to new forge gun with optimal of 25, effective of 125, ultimate of 250)

I could go on, but I've already lost interest.

Seems a little disjointed, but I suppose that's because you clipped most of it, like you said.

I never really had an issue with the idea of separate drivers and gunners myself, but it seems our community isn't interested in that kind of mechanic, to say the least.

As far as small rails, I'd LOVE to see them work as you described. Right now they just aren't even worth fitting.

besides rails having less optimal range then missiles meh...work in the right step. needs more bacon too.

So I was most-way through a lengthy write-up on all things V and AV and decided to delete it. I will post the highlights though mainly because I like the conversation more than believe DUST has a real future.

Caldari philosophy - these guys are all about the bottom line, they want stuff that performs top tier, but they cut the corners so they only live up to expectations when used skillfully.

Gallente philosophy - they "focus" on omni-performance, in their efforts to shore up weaknesses, they only have the advantage when they can engage outside of their opponents' strengths.

Amarr philosophy - imposing and enlightened, amarr vehicles can be summed up as "floating bricks", they favor laser and missile recoiless weaponry to compensate for their lack of traction.

Minmitar philosophy - brutal simplicity, stripped of all but the barest essentials, even their HAV is little more than an oversized buggy, speed and aggression is everything since they cannot win a contest of endurance.

HAVs - the support vehicle, large, imposing, dangerous, your ball breakers and your anchors, very vulnerable in CQC with infantry.

LAVs - flanker and harassment, quick, nimble, they swoop in to tip the balance in infantry fights, must be coordinated or lucky to bring down HAVs or turrets.

DSs - logistics, they bring stuff from point A to point B direct, occasionally provides a little rain, optionally brings ammo, spawns, or fit swapping to an otherwise stranded squad or vehicle.

Some specifics of the big changes:

Costs start at 50k (fully fit militia) to 300k (fully fit prototype) using typical gear

All HAVs lose the top small turret, drivers occupy that seat but cannot aim large turret

Small turrets act like handheld weapon analogs with slightly tweaked magazines but similar range and damage profiles

Large turrets have roughly 5x the optimal range and 1.5x the damage of infantry weapons

Sica, Gunloggi, etc - main turret limited to 120-¦ arc, forward shields have innate 50% resists, rear armor so weak even ARs can seriously threaten it

Soma, Madruger, etc - no rear or undercarriage weak point, very good torque, can ignore almost all small arm fire, least vulnerable to infantry of HAV class

Small rails do full damage to vehicles, large rail has optimal of 100, effective of 400, ultimate of 650 (compared to new forge gun with optimal of 25, effective of 125, ultimate of 250)

I could go on, but I've already lost interest.

Large turrets with only 1.5x dmg on infantry weapons? Meaning a large blaster with 1.5x DPS of an AR? No thanks. And small turrets that eliminate your mobility and cost a ton plus the suit for the same DPS? You serious bro?

Missiles should have the same range, they just give have a flat damage no matter how close or far away when they explode. In effect, they end up the best damage at long range, worst in close range, and long travel times make them harder to blap randomly.

So I was most-way through a lengthy write-up on all things V and AV and decided to delete it. I will post the highlights though mainly because I like the conversation more than believe DUST has a real future.

Caldari philosophy - these guys are all about the bottom line, they want stuff that performs top tier, but they cut the corners so they only live up to expectations when used skillfully.

Gallente philosophy - they "focus" on omni-performance, in their efforts to shore up weaknesses, they only have the advantage when they can engage outside of their opponents' strengths.

Amarr philosophy - imposing and enlightened, amarr vehicles can be summed up as "floating bricks", they favor laser and missile recoiless weaponry to compensate for their lack of traction.

Minmitar philosophy - brutal simplicity, stripped of all but the barest essentials, even their HAV is little more than an oversized buggy, speed and aggression is everything since they cannot win a contest of endurance.

HAVs - the support vehicle, large, imposing, dangerous, your ball breakers and your anchors, very vulnerable in CQC with infantry.

LAVs - flanker and harassment, quick, nimble, they swoop in to tip the balance in infantry fights, must be coordinated or lucky to bring down HAVs or turrets.

DSs - logistics, they bring stuff from point A to point B direct, occasionally provides a little rain, optionally brings ammo, spawns, or fit swapping to an otherwise stranded squad or vehicle.

Some specifics of the big changes:

Costs start at 50k (fully fit militia) to 300k (fully fit prototype) using typical gear

All HAVs lose the top small turret, drivers occupy that seat but cannot aim large turret

Small turrets act like handheld weapon analogs with slightly tweaked magazines but similar range and damage profiles

Large turrets have roughly 5x the optimal range and 1.5x the damage of infantry weapons

Sica, Gunloggi, etc - main turret limited to 120-¦ arc, forward shields have innate 50% resists, rear armor so weak even ARs can seriously threaten it

Soma, Madruger, etc - no rear or undercarriage weak point, very good torque, can ignore almost all small arm fire, least vulnerable to infantry of HAV class

Small rails do full damage to vehicles, large rail has optimal of 100, effective of 400, ultimate of 650 (compared to new forge gun with optimal of 25, effective of 125, ultimate of 250)

I could go on, but I've already lost interest.

i didnt spec into tanks so someone else could use it for me

Missiles should have the same range, they just give have a flat damage no matter how close or far away when they explode. In effect, they end up the best damage at long range, worst in close range, and long travel times make them harder to blap randomly.

Somewhere it got lost that vehicles should become much cheaper and situationally more durable. An AR already does a crapton of DPS, anything higher is asking for an infantry murderer.

But a good gunner can only get a 50% hit rate with a blaster most of the time. So 3X DPS would be more appropriate. And a blaster should never have 5X the effective range of an AR, that's a really long range man. Same with railgun/FG 3x range seems more appropriate. And what pulls you equate missiles to? Mass drives? 5x range is a bit short then isn't it. On the damage though only a fraction of the damage can be effectivly applied to infantry and they need the av level DPS against tanks.

Until the maps are MUCH larger, I don't see how any of the vehicles can really perform the tasks you have outlined in the OP.

Well, in theory if they make them disposable instead of game changers, it would be reasonable to use them in the small DUST maps.