So are we to refer to tankers as pilots now? Cause NO. Pilots fly. Tankers drive. Even in space.

What do you mean now? they always have. Where you been bro?

So are we to refer to tankers as pilots now? Cause NO. Pilots fly. Tankers drive. Even in space.

So are we to refer to tankers as pilots now? Cause NO. Pilots fly. Tankers drive. Even in space.

The term "Pilot", on this forum, actually refers to the yet-to-be-released Pilot suit, which will provide bonuses to vehicles.

So are we to refer to tankers as pilots now? Cause NO. Pilots fly. Tankers drive. Even in space.

Amen brotha!

It's like I've said in other threads; killing a tank shouldn't be the deciding factor with solo proto AVers. They seem to want to be able to kill the tank or its unacceptable.

Removing the tank from the fight should be the goal of proto AV abilities. When the tank is scared off and has to recoup it is a non-issue.

A tanker shouldn't have to deal with either alive or dead. I want to enjoy a tank in a match. My tank should be able to stay alive if I plan ahead for my mods. Your only worry as infantry is that the tank is in the fight. If my tank is out of the fight repping and cooling down then we both win. I can continue to use the thing I trained in and enjoy the game. You get to not worry about my tank for awhile.

The dev post on tank changes seem to be pointing to a greater contrast of the tank being able to be invulnerable temporarily and then be very vulnerable on cooldown.

A proto AVer should have to work to destroy a tank and be smart, not sit on a roof and wait for the tank to just stroll by.

A dedicated AVer should be able to observe the route a tank takes and go where the tank is going to be passing by in its vulnerable state.

Easy. I see no reason for complaints by infantry players unless those players just want to have an easy kill with little effort. They can't accept a tank still being alive but sitting on the redline repping and out of combat.

That just doesn't do it for them because their goal of a tank kill goes unfulfilled. Nevermind they have done their job of suppressing the tank and keeping it pushed back. On no! That doesn't add to their k/d ratio.

Please read title broski. to non-pilots lol.

I agree with everything posted on here except for the ADV and PRO vehicles.

Based on the current skill tree and lack of any confirmation from the devs, we're not getting ADV or PRO tanks. What the vehicle tree currently does is have you skill into the base vehicle, which then branches off into variations of the vehicle (HAV -> Enforcer, DS -> Logi / Assault), and quite honestly, I pray to the Flying Spaghetti Monster that they never tier the vehicles.

So what because some people don't drive tanks we should have no say in their development, despite the fact its a part of the game that affects everyone?

While I agree the view of some non tankers is a bit irrational, you cant expect to sit by and allow you to overpower tanks, becausethat iis the view of some tankers.

Its about a little give and take!!

You're arguing semantics. That's not what this thread is about. Start a thread about proper grammar if you want to argue about that.

We consider ourselves pilots because sometime we're getting the pilot suit to improve our vehicles.

Did you have coffee today?

Its about a little give and take!!

it is possible and likely that someone could get thrown into a match where there is a tanker but no AV at which point the tank is op or the tank could get thrown into a match with 2+ AV players where the tank is up. how do we prevent this?

Some? A bit irrational?

A grenade that does ~2000 damage to armor isn't enough! A tracking AV weapon that does > 2000 damage per volley isn't enough! It's not enough to merely suppress a tank and make it go away! How is that just a bit irrational?

Some? A bit irrational?

A grenade that does ~2000 damage to armor isn't enough! A tracking AV weapon that does > 2000 damage per volley isn't enough! It's not enough to merely suppress a tank and make it go away! How is that just a bit irrational?

its only when people are tired of your stomping that they turn to av

when a rail turret kills all with 1 shot, when a blaster turret kills a player in 1-2 hits. yet you in your tank can and do often survive 4 or 5 hits before blowing. its only when people are tired of your stomping that they turn to av and its never a single av player its always more.

and you say we have no right to say what happens with tanks.

You are starting to sound irrational yourself.
Calm down, there are many reasons people want to kill tanks.

1) WP : No kill no points, there is no reward for "suppresing" a tank
2) "Suppresion" : Getting a tank to run only achieves a momentary respite, we wouldn't mind if "suppresing" a tank kept him suppresed
3) Power: The power per person in a tank is out of kilter, 1 man is pretty much as powerful as a tank with 3, this is wrong
4) Whining: when tankers whine about how weak their tanks are we get annoyed because of the power curve!! If we were to have the current system and released proto hulls it would be the end of infantry, period!!

What good is a tank if it doesn't do a lot of damage? You want a hull with no better than an Exile rifle. Is that what you want? They're called tanks for a reason. They take a lot of damage, and they have a really big gun.

Shall we talk about the disparity between large railgun turrets and forge guns? You decide

What good is a tank if it doesn't do a lot of damage? You have a hull with no better than an Exile rifle. Is that what you want? They're called tanks for a reason. They take a lot of damage, and they have a really big gun.

Shall we talk about the disparity between large railgun turrets and forge guns? You decide

It seems the "tankers" want to go back to the supertanker days during closed beta. Sorry tanks have always been vulnerable to a single person with a RPG. LIke always.

and they also have a crew, a driver who drives the vehicle, a gunner who controls the gun, and a commander who directs both crew members

If they were that vulnerable, we wouldn't be using them in the Middle East.

Why are you so afraid of tanks? You're given incredibly effective and easy to use tools to take care of them, yet you still complain and seem scared. Why are you scared?

What good is a tank if it doesn't do a lot of damage? You have a hull with no better than an Exile rifle. Is that what you want? They're called tanks for a reason. They take a lot of damage, and they have a really big gun.

Shall we talk about the disparity between large railgun turrets and forge guns? You decide

This isn't World of Tanks, and from what I've gathered from other people telling me about the game, it's still the one player controlling the whole tank, not a couple people operating it cooperatively. So any point you were trying to make is still moot, because, well, it's a game.

the field in less than 2 seconds even Militia noobs.

a TANK requires multiple, fully dedicated AVers working in coordination to even suppress for a momentary respite.

You do realize we have "Up armored" our tanks right? Guess not.

P.S. Sooo not fraid. Proto nades and swarms .

So do you want to go back to the supertanker days? Seems so.

You seem to be a bit temperamental about this whole subject.

I could take what you just said about tanks and apply it to Heavies. Actually, I can't because Heavies can't really even take a lot more damage than a Med. Class Suit. We have a the HMG, which is actually worse than an Exile.

They're called heavies for a reason.

What disparity between the Large Railgun and the FG?

Assault FG - 2 Second Charge Time

Rail Turret - .08 Second charge time.

Assault FG - 4 Shots per clip, 4 reloads max.

Rail Turret - infinite

Assault FG - Carried by very slow, very large, easy to hit target with HP comparable to suits smaller than it's class. Can be killed by 95% of the players on the field in less than 2 seconds even Militia noobs.

Rail Turret - Carried by a TANK! Thousands of HP, requires multiple, fully dedicated AVers working in coordination to even suppress for a momentary respite.

So, yea, lets talk about that disparity.

if thats the case then your points are moot also. why would this being a game make your points valid and everyone elses moot

Please, assume I'm an idiot and know nothing about American firepower. The same concept carries through to Dust.

PRO crutches are what they are.

I don't remember "supertanker" days.

Okkk. Sooo. The reason we are having this discussion right now is because in the Beta at some points tanks were almost invincible and caused many QQ's.

Tanks are called tanks for a reason. Massive suppression, massive firepower, and enough HP to take some damage before needing to run away.

So it's all about the WP? For merely suppressing a tank, there's no reward? Maybe you should petition CCP to put in Battlefield-like rewards.

So we're still at this point, because even after so many consecutive nerfs to tanks, and so many parallel buffs to AV, infantry still think tanks are overpowered? From a point over a year ago, to now? All of that considered, tanks are still overpowered?

Got it

Hey everyone it's me Surt Gods End. A FPS Player. (That's right, I don't touch that mmo rubbish. Nor did I migrate from DCUO nor eve)

Just wanted to add to OP list of facts.

FACT 1- Takes one cool dude in RL to take out tank.

FACT 2- Takes one cool dude in a FPS video game to take out tank.

FACT 3- Dust is a lobby FPS.

FACT 4- HAV plays SUPPORT ROLES IN MOST FPS GAMES.

FACT 5- If the price for tanks and DS are lowered, less QQ will be had from pilots. and more HAV and DS will be seen on the field.




FACT 6- Tankers will die more with FACT 5. But lowered price should negate that. What's that? you don't think you should die more than 2 a match? Well... Harden The **** Up.

Amen brotha!

It's like I've said in other threads; killing a tank shouldn't be the deciding factor with solo proto AVers. They seem to want to be able to kill the tank or it's unacceptable.

Removing the tank from the fight should be the goal of proto AV abilities. When the tank is scared off and has to recoup it is a non-issue.

A tanker shouldn't have to deal with either alive or dead. I want to enjoy a tank in a match. My tank should be able to stay alive if I plan ahead for my mods. Your only worry as infantry is that the tank is in the fight. If my tank is out of the fight repping and cooling down then we both win. I can continue to use the thing I trained in and enjoy the game. You get to not worry about my tank for awhile.

FACT 3- Dust is a lobby FPS.

This was a lobby shooter.

FACT 5- If the price for tanks and DS are lowered, less QQ will be had from pilots. and more HAV and DS will be seen on the field.

That's like dumbing down enemy AI in Last of Us because the friendly AI is so bad that it keeps getting you found out. So what did the dev do? Make it so that when you're taking cover behind something, and your friendly AI is standing up, the enemy AI doesn't know where you are. It doesn't fix any problems at all, just more easily showcases bad design.

Brilliant! To be fair, we should also make it so infantry cannot be killed by tank fire. To paraphrase, '[i]f my infantry is out of the fight repping and cooling down then we both win'.

Do you even consistency, bro?

This thread is amazing! Apparently you have to be a dedicated tanker in order to have an opinion on tanks. Does that mean you have to be a dedicated AVer in order to have an opinion on AV?

This is my favourite bit though:

Brilliant! To be fair, we should also make it so infantry cannot be killed by tank fire. To paraphrase, '[i]f my infantry is out of the fight repping and cooling down then we both win'.

Do you even consistency, bro?

Don't hate the player hate the game. I'm just telling you like it is. Don't think it's fair? lol ask the dropship pilots. They suffered the same thing.

An Anti-Tank weaponry is called Anti-Tank because it stops tanks! You can't have your cake and eat it, spike!

Everything needs a counter, you are beginning to sound a bit greedy!

You think it should destroy a tank with one hit. At least, that's what you sound like.

You don't blabla.
blablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablabla Remember that.

You think it should destroy a tank with one hit. At least, that's what you sound like.

and you think a tank should kill all and survive every game. thats what you sound like

You conveniently left out damage done, and the fact that you could put on damage mods without sacrificing much defense.

This thread is a waste of data.

Don't put words in my mouth please! You said you want a tank to be a "tank", if that were the case then I would expect anti-tank weaponry to be "anti-tank"

You need to think about how your idea of a tank will shape the battlefield, because it sounds like you want an unbeatable trump card!!

You don't tank.

You have no idea what it's like to see a third of your armor melt away from one volley of PRO swarms. You don't know what it's like to see a third of your armor melt away from one packed Lai Dai.

You don't tank. Stop thinking you know how they're supposed to work.

It takes less than 300,000 SP to get Haywire Wiyrkomis. Fact

You don't know what it's like to have to deal with blue dots that want to get in your tank for half a battle. They get indignant that you won't give them anything to shoot at.

You don't tank.

So what do they do? They shoot your tank. They melee it. They shoot it some more. They throw grenades at it. They shoot it some more. They get back in the turret. They shoot the turret. They switch seats if they're the only other one in it. They switch seats rapidly in hopes of getting the driver's seat. They jump out and shoot the tank again. They punch the tank again. They get back in the tank and fire the turrets at nothing.

Every installation counts as a direct threat to us. I remember during Chromosome, I forgot which skill it was, that at level 5, caused turrets to not shoot at you when you ran towards them. That obviously did not work when in a vehicle.

We don't have ADV or PRO vehicles.

Driver and main turret operation cannot be split up, because we do not rely on blue dots. The culmination of however good any of us are is the direct result of observing how blue dots are, which is useless, and knowing who in our squad we can rely on. We use the terrain to our advantage. We use range to our advantage. We use the time it takes to reload to our advantage. We use speed to our advantage.

I absolutely will not rely on a blue dot I do not know to man my turret, because I'll be damned if I'm going to let a random drive my tank. Splitting operation would be the absolute worst thing CCP could do for tanking, and would destroy it completely. As a result, most tanks would probably biomass their character and either start going full infantry, or just never play this game again.

You don't tank. You don't have experience tanking.

MLT hull and modules =/= STD hull and modules.

What happened when everybody complained about contact grenades. They got nerfed into the ground. Next time a tanker complains about AV grenades, make sure you remember what I said about infantry contact grenades.

Double standards

Contact grenades are/were the only thing that homed in on infantry. We have to worry about swarm launchers, which track us for 400m before automatically terminating. When they hit, they hit hard, really hard. Wiyrkomis hit for around 7000 damage against armor before having to reload, if all 3 volleys hit.

Contact grenades got nerfed. AV grenades haven't.

Terrain damages vehicles. Not so much anymore for infantry.

Next time another non-pilot makes a thread about tanks, whatever it may be, remember this thread.

You don't have the experience we have. It's actually quite easy to destroy us, if you know how to do it, and considering the complaints on here about tanks, only a sad few actually know how to destroy us. If it takes a tanker to write out how to destroy us, you're doing it wrong now, you did it wrong before, and you'll probably continue to do it wrong until you reach that eureka moment, when you and 2 people beside you destroy a tank in 3 seconds. Until then, you'll vainly try to solo the best tankers in the game.

Also, the huge majority of us are in skirmish and domination, not ambush. When you say "tank" and "ambush" in the same sentence, I want you to take a few minutes and think really hard before posting a reply / threat with those words in the same sentence. The guys that habitually tank in ambush are the ones worried about KD/R. The rest of us just want to win and kill a few infantry along the way.

You don't tank.

I've heard that those who tank in ambush, do poorly when it comes to skirmish / domination / faction warfare / planetary conquest, because they don't have to worry about much in ambush. In the other modes, they have to worry about the world trying to kill them.

Remember what I said before you complain about tanks. We not only have to deal with your PRO gear, we have to deal with stupid blue dots as well.

Late Edit:

This is what happens when you shoot a tank with a rifle. Remember that.

=/=

Is it wrong saying it should require teamwork to take down a tank? Or have another tank available that could take advantage of a weakness? Yeah, I laugh when I see enforcers on the field, but when I see them using a turret they get their bonus too, I worry a bit. Falchion with XT-201 accelerated? I'll keep it back with a railgun. Vayu with scattered ion cannon? Same thing, railgun.

Christ, you put up a petition to have tanks removed! You're as biased as they get.

Anything else?

Lol

I want challenges. I like challenges. What you seem to want is for tanks to be made so weak that one volley of ADV swarms could destroy it, just like that. I'm fighting to prevent more nerfs to tanks. You're fighting in favor of more nerfs. Tankers have adapted through over a year of nerfs, while AV have continued to complain through over a year of various buffs.

If they were that vulnerable, we wouldn't be using them in the Middle East.

Why are you so afraid of tanks? You're given incredibly effective and easy to use tools to take care of them, yet you still complain and seem scared. Why are you scared?

Ishukone AFG Meta 8 Base DPS 756

80GJ Regulated Particle Cannon Meta 8 Base DPS 799 (Damage/Fire interval)

Soooo like I said, lets talk about that disparity...

you couldn't be more wrong. i want tanks. just not the solo god like killing machines that you want. and why should it take a team to take out a tank that can solo. that is not balance. thats as one sided as it gets.

if it took 3 people to operate the tank and 3 people to take it out then thats an acceptable balance.

To non-AV guys making vehicle threads:

You don't AV.

You have no idea what it's like to see a third of your PRO swarms swerve into hillsides or simply vanish on the way to a target. You don't know what it's like to see a third of your Lai Dai throws "miss" because their guidance systems aren't as reliable as some tankers assume.

You don't AV. Stop thinking you know how it's supposed to work.

It takes less than 300,000 SP to get a Sica which takes more than 3 Haywire Wiyrkomis. Fact

You don't know what it's like to have to deal with blue dots that want to jump in front of every Swarm volley you fire. They get indignant that you won't use an AR like they do.

You don't AV.

So what do they do? They park LAVs in your path. They melee you when you're lining up a shot. They make you think you're taking fire and panic-launch Swarms on the wrong angle. They throw grenades at you. They shoot you some more. They run you over in their LAVs to prove they can teamkill.

Every weapon but a Swarm Launcher counts as a direct threat to us. I remember during every build, seeing AV guys dying to ARs, Shotguns, Sniper Rifles on a regular basis. That obviously did not happen when in a vehicle.

---

You can't, as a pure tanker, tell the full story of how vehicle vs. AV should work, because you're biased. You've only played one side. Yes, the opinions of tankers, Dropship pilots, and legitimate NON-MURDER TAXI LAV drivers are valid and important. But so are the experiences of the grenadiers, Swarm guys and Forge Gunners who hunt those vehicles down.

Way back in E3, when tanks were arguably at their most powerful, and inarguably at their cheapest (with SIcas and Somas being handed out LITERALLY FOR FREE), I started out as an AV player. I ran Swarm Launchers, and I got pretty good with them. Back then, you could use Swarms for anti-infantry - they could be dumbfired and would explode on impact. No homing against anything but vehicles, but they were still a credible threat. I rarely used them in that way, preferring to save my limited ammo supply and switch to my trusty SMG when confronted with a soft target. I was, as an AV player, interested in the discussions of vehicle vs. AV balance, and I said my piece from what I believed was a well-reasoned perspective. I forget who it was, but someone made a thread much like this one, and I thought about it quite a lot. I created an alt, and I got into tanking for myself. I learned to drive (and I still want the optional L2/R2 LAV scheme on tanks, because shoving it all on the sticks is a horrible idea) and I learned to build a tank. I've sat and watched as Shield Tanks went from underpowered to overpowered and back, as Missile Turrets were broken OP, then "fixed" via nerfing everything at once until they stop doing anything, then fixed into moderate usefulness again. I know that vehicles and AV both need work, and I know this from experience on BOTH sides of the argument, not just one.

There are too many people on both sides of this problem who seem to think CCP can fix everything by only addressing one side. They can't. We need more tankers who are willing to listen to the AV guys, and we need more AV guys who realise that vehicles pilots/drivers know what we're doing too.

Can't we all just get along?

You seem to be a bit temperamental about this whole subject.

I could take what you just said about tanks and apply it to Heavies. Actually, I can't because Heavies can't really even take a lot more damage than a Med. Class Suit. We have a the HMG, which is actually worse than an Exile.

They're called heavies for a reason.

What disparity between the Large Railgun and the FG?

Assault FG - 2 Second Charge Time

Rail Turret - .08 Second charge time.

Assault FG - 4 Shots per clip, 4 reloads max.

Rail Turret - infinite

Assault FG - Carried by very slow, very large, easy to hit target with HP comparable to suits smaller than it's class. Can be killed by 95% of the players on the field in less than 2 seconds even Militia noobs.

Rail Turret - Carried by a TANK! Thousands of HP, requires multiple, fully dedicated AVers working in coordination to even suppress for a momentary respite.

So, yea, lets talk about that disparity.

It seems the "tankers" want to go back to the supertanker days during closed beta. Sorry tanks have always been vulnerable to a single person with a RPG. LIke always.

HAHAHA... Oh man, Dude you even read at what you post? You played FPS games dude? Socom has a HUGE Following. You think they went down cause they had a small fan base? LOL

SOCOM- PS4. Bet on it.

Now here's another lobby fps game, that tripped itself cause it forgot what legs it stands itself on. Can you say Niche?

When I saw this I felt like I had to chime in
You do know that a RPG 29 developed in the 80s can still damage the armor of an M1 Abrams tank and kill and wound crew members inside the tank right
As for why do we still use them, well against small arms fire what can you really say is better and in those situations we dont send our tanks alone they go with full infantry support in the event that the enemy does have infantry held anti tank weapons

In short, QQ moar, learn to drive and stop leaving your teammates behind to be a glory hound
Ive run across some tankers, hell brand new ones in militia tanks even, that know to stick close to a squad providing a wall of cover and fire support while we do our thing and watch his back against anyone trying to sneak up with some grenades or scan the roof tops for anyone trying to get the drop with a swarm or forge

Scratch our back and we will scratch yours, whine at us and charge off alone we will let you die just like you should let someone die if he decides he doesnt need the fire support and runs off by himself

To non-AV guys making vehicle threads:

You don't AV.

You have no idea what it's like to see a third of your PRO swarms swerve into hillsides or simply vanish on the way to a target. You don't know what it's like to see a third of your Lai Dai throws "miss" because their guidance systems aren't as reliable as some tankers assume.

You don't AV. Stop thinking you know how it's supposed to work.

It takes less than 300,000 SP to get a Sica which takes more than 3 Haywire Wiyrkomis. Fact

You don't know what it's like to have to deal with blue dots that want to jump in front of every Swarm volley you fire. They get indignant that you won't use an AR like they do.

You don't AV.

So what do they do? They park LAVs in your path. They melee you when you're lining up a shot. They make you think you're taking fire and panic-launch Swarms on the wrong angle. They throw grenades at you. They shoot you some more. They run you over in their LAVs to prove they can teamkill.

Every weapon but a Swarm Launcher counts as a direct threat to us. I remember during every build, seeing AV guys dying to ARs, Shotguns, Sniper Rifles on a regular basis. That obviously did not happen when in a vehicle.

---

You can't, as a pure tanker, tell the full story of how vehicle vs. AV should work, because you're biased. You've only played one side. Yes, the opinions of tankers, Dropship pilots, and legitimate NON-MURDER TAXI LAV drivers are valid and important. But so are the experiences of the grenadiers, Swarm guys and Forge Gunners who hunt those vehicles down.

Way back in E3, when tanks were arguably at their most powerful, and inarguably at their cheapest (with SIcas and Somas being handed out LITERALLY FOR FREE), I started out as an AV player. I ran Swarm Launchers, and I got pretty good with them. Back then, you could use Swarms for anti-infantry - they could be dumbfired and would explode on impact. No homing against anything but vehicles, but they were still a credible threat. I rarely used them in that way, preferring to save my limited ammo supply and switch to my trusty SMG when confronted with a soft target. I was, as an AV player, interested in the discussions of vehicle vs. AV balance, and I said my piece from what I believed was a well-reasoned perspective. I forget who it was, but someone made a thread much like this one, and I thought about it quite a lot. I created an alt, and I got into tanking for myself. I learned to drive (and I still want the optional L2/R2 LAV scheme on tanks, because shoving it all on the sticks is a horrible idea) and I learned to build a tank. I've sat and watched as Shield Tanks went from underpowered to overpowered and back, as Missile Turrets were broken OP, then "fixed" via nerfing everything at once until they stop doing anything, then fixed into moderate usefulness again. I know that vehicles and AV both need work, and I know this from experience on BOTH sides of the argument, not just one.

There are too many people on both sides of this problem who seem to think CCP can fix everything by only addressing one side. They can't. We need more tankers who are willing to listen to the AV guys, and we need more AV guys who realise that vehicles pilots/drivers know what we're doing too.

Can't we all just get along?

mmmmmmmmm there you go :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=67-fLCF3AY4

And that a old tank .... old P.O.S soviet era tank .

I just thought I'd blow your mind in showing you that ...... one RPG DOES NOT..... destroy the tank.

I keep seeing people say that on here and laugh .

Keep fighting each other to make the game worse than it already is .



Didn't we learn anything from the mag forums?

Here's the most ill-informed infantryman replying to a tank thread.

To non-AV guys making vehicle threads:

You don't AV.

You have no idea what it's like to see a third of your PRO swarms swerve into hillsides or simply vanish on the way to a target. You don't know what it's like to see a third of your Lai Dai throws "miss" because their guidance systems aren't as reliable as some tankers assume.

You don't AV. Stop thinking you know how it's supposed to work.

It takes less than 300,000 SP to get a Sica which takes more than 3 Haywire Wiyrkomis. Fact

You don't know what it's like to have to deal with blue dots that want to jump in front of every Swarm volley you fire. They get indignant that you won't use an AR like they do.

You don't AV.

So what do they do? They park LAVs in your path. They melee you when you're lining up a shot. They make you think you're taking fire and panic-launch Swarms on the wrong angle. They throw grenades at you. They shoot you some more. They run you over in their LAVs to prove they can teamkill.

Every weapon but a Swarm Launcher counts as a direct threat to us. I remember during every build, seeing AV guys dying to ARs, Shotguns, Sniper Rifles on a regular basis. That obviously did not happen when in a vehicle.

---

You can't, as a pure tanker, tell the full story of how vehicle vs. AV should work, because you're biased. You've only played one side. Yes, the opinions of tankers, Dropship pilots, and legitimate NON-MURDER TAXI LAV drivers are valid and important. But so are the experiences of the grenadiers, Swarm guys and Forge Gunners who hunt those vehicles down.

Way back in E3, when tanks were arguably at their most powerful, and inarguably at their cheapest (with SIcas and Somas being handed out LITERALLY FOR FREE), I started out as an AV player. I ran Swarm Launchers, and I got pretty good with them. Back then, you could use Swarms for anti-infantry - they could be dumbfired and would explode on impact. No homing against anything but vehicles, but they were still a credible threat. I rarely used them in that way, preferring to save my limited ammo supply and switch to my trusty SMG when confronted with a soft target. I was, as an AV player, interested in the discussions of vehicle vs. AV balance, and I said my piece from what I believed was a well-reasoned perspective. I forget who it was, but someone made a thread much like this one, and I thought about it quite a lot. I created an alt, and I got into tanking for myself. I learned to drive (and I still want the optional L2/R2 LAV scheme on tanks, because shoving it all on the sticks is a horrible idea) and I learned to build a tank. I've sat and watched as Shield Tanks went from underpowered to overpowered and back, as Missile Turrets were broken OP, then "fixed" via nerfing everything at once until they stop doing anything, then fixed into moderate usefulness again. I know that vehicles and AV both need work, and I know this from experience on BOTH sides of the argument, not just one.

There are too many people on both sides of this problem who seem to think CCP can fix everything by only addressing one side. They can't. We need more tankers who are willing to listen to the AV guys, and we need more AV guys who realise that vehicles pilots/drivers know what we're doing too.

Can't we all just get along?

Anything else?

It seems the "tankers" want to go back to the supertanker days during closed beta. Sorry tanks have always been vulnerable to a single person with a RPG. LIke always.

SOCOM has a huge following? Really? Half of it died out.

=/=

Is it wrong saying it should require teamwork to take down a tank? Or have another tank available that could take advantage of a weakness? Yeah, I laugh when I see enforcers on the field, but when I see them using a turret they get their bonus too, I worry a bit. Falchion with XT-201 accelerated? I'll keep it back with a railgun. Vayu with scattered ion cannon? Same thing, railgun.

Christ, you put up a petition to have tanks removed! You're as biased as they get.

Have you read any of the threads made by people that don't tank? That would be like us telling you how your dropsuits, weapons and equipment work. "It takes too long for me to kill you with my STD blaster, therefore your HP should be lowered, or extenders should be lowered." It just doesn't work that way. You're not going to be using a tank when the vehicle balance pass comes, so why do you care?

Is it wrong saying it should require teamwork to take down a tank?

delta you have obviously never played bf3 they are NOT that weak in it

AV is like Anti Vehicle, its the counter to your vehicle, if we need 2-3 guys to counter your tank they guns would need to be renamed to SV (Supressing Vehicle), AV is designed to blow you up.

Learn to live with it.

we do Master Jaraiya because our blueberries do nothing just went 18-0 in my tank I couldn't get passed the main gate because there was a good 4-7 AV they were only militia but I can't take constant volleys of swarms and forge shots, I would sit there killing as many as I could then once I hit the 3,000 hp threshold I retreated to a supply depot. I lost because my blue berries couldn't kill a half a dozen AV starter fits and a couple other militia ARs who were all focused on me. If they had advanced gear I would not have survived simple as that.

One guy running around with a hand portable weapon should not be able to single handedly take out a tank.

I wasnt talking about game tanks and AV, Speaker wanted to go rambling about how "Its a tank for a reason, real world blah blah blah" so I brought up a real world example
Weapons tech usually advances faster than defensive tech so even older stuff can still pose a threat to modern defenses

Now will the RPG 29 leave an Abrams a smoking pile of scrap, nope
But will it shred some armor and turn any crew member unlucky enough to be near the impact point into chunky salsa, you better believe it

Hell, lets change AV so it does that, less overall damage to the hull put damages the crew depending on impact point and if its enough damage to kill you then someone can come along and hijack your tank with it working at half capacity or something

Has it so rough, goes 18/0 in a match.

we do know what's it's like to see all of our armor and hp disappear from tank blasters and rail guns.

Can you back any of that up or is this you throwing a tantrum again since I came at your ranting with examples that run contrary to what you want
Oh and are you going to challenge me to drive a tank with you again and then duck out one more time, that would be three in a row you've almost got the hat trick

I don't think 18-0, for example, says much about the situation... other than that you don't want other folks getting such scores?

Simply comparing direct hit damage does not give an accurate representation. You have to use the DPS. Furthermore, when discussing the DPS of the FG you must also factor in the reload time. SO,

MLT FG has 3 shots per clip, 4 second charge time, 8 second reload time.

MLT FG 660 DPS MLT Heavy Dropsuit HP 707

MLT Rail Turret DPS 522 Soma HP 3,651

SO, it would take 5.5 Seconds to kill a MLT Soma with an all MLT Heavy, with no skills in either.

MLT AR DPS 425

It would take a full MLT Assault 1.6 seconds to kill a Full MLT Heavy

You tankers have it so rough.

I agree with you about the RPG. But have you ever heard of the AT4?

mmmmmmmmm there you go :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=67-fLCF3AY4

And that a old tank .... old P.O.S soviet era tank .

I just thought I'd blow your mind in showing you that ...... one RPG DOES NOT..... destroy the tank.

I keep seeing people say that on here and laugh .

Keep fighting each other to make the game worse than it already is .



Didn't we learn anything from the mag forums?

It's a long first post. Do you have trouble reading anything longer than a single paragraph?

So how about when it was mathematically proven that the Duvolle TAR was on par with ADV large blasters?

So how about when it was mathematically proven that the Duvolle TAR was on par with ADV large blasters?

This thread is amazing! Apparently you have to be a dedicated tanker in order to have an opinion on tanks. Does that mean you have to be a dedicated AVer in order to have an opinion on AV?

This is my favourite bit though:

Brilliant! To be fair, we should also make it so infantry cannot be killed by tank fire. To paraphrase, '[i]f my infantry is out of the fight repping and cooling down then we both win'.

Do you even consistency, bro?

I care because, if tankers were left to decide how to balance the game, every pub would be a 50-1 stomp from squads of tankers (which I've seen happen several times, btw) and every PC would be six (or whatever the limit is) tanks per side with all infantry hiding from their metal overlords in dark corners of the city. For example, this line

which most tankers have come out with at some stage, is a call for unbalancing the game. It means that a side with a tank has an effective two man advantage over a side without one, as one tanker is enough to make, say, three infantry put down their ARs/HMGs. The same goes for 2 tanks versus 1, 3 vs 2, etc. To maximize competitiveness you'd have to field the maximum number of tanks.

Your right, I've killed plenty of maddys with a AR.

I dont think this guy got your memo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8pwmdAjePLY

You don't tank.

You have no idea what it's like to see a third of your armor melt away from one volley of PRO swarms. You don't know what it's like to see a third of your armor melt away from one packed Lai Dai.

You don't tank. Stop thinking you know how they're supposed to work.

It takes less than 300,000 SP to get Haywire Wiyrkomis. Fact

You don't know what it's like to have to deal with blue dots that want to get in your tank for half a battle. They get indignant that you won't give them anything to shoot at.

You don't tank.

So what do they do? They shoot your tank. They melee it. They shoot it some more. They throw grenades at it. They shoot it some more. They get back in the turret. They shoot the turret. They switch seats if they're the only other one in it. They switch seats rapidly in hopes of getting the driver's seat. They jump out and shoot the tank again. They punch the tank again. They get back in the tank and fire the turrets at nothing.

Every installation counts as a direct threat to us. I remember during Chromosome, I forgot which skill it was, that at level 5, caused turrets to not shoot at you when you ran towards them. That obviously did not work when in a vehicle.

We don't have ADV or PRO vehicles.

Driver and main turret operation cannot be split up, because we do not rely on blue dots. The culmination of however good any of us are is the direct result of observing how blue dots are, which is useless, and knowing who in our squad we can rely on. We use the terrain to our advantage. We use range to our advantage. We use the time it takes to reload to our advantage. We use speed to our advantage.

I absolutely will not rely on a blue dot I do not know to man my turret, because I'll be damned if I'm going to let a random drive my tank. Splitting operation would be the absolute worst thing CCP could do for tanking, and would destroy it completely. As a result, most tanks would probably biomass their character and either start going full infantry, or just never play this game again.

You don't tank. You don't have experience tanking.

MLT hull and modules =/= STD hull and modules.

What happened when everybody complained about contact grenades. They got nerfed into the ground. Next time a tanker complains about AV grenades, make sure you remember what I said about infantry contact grenades.

Double standards

Contact grenades are/were the only thing that homed in on infantry. We have to worry about swarm launchers, which track us for 400m before automatically terminating. When they hit, they hit hard, really hard. Wiyrkomis hit for around 7000 damage against armor before having to reload, if all 3 volleys hit.

Contact grenades got nerfed. AV grenades haven't.

Terrain damages vehicles. Not so much anymore for infantry.

Next time another non-pilot makes a thread about tanks, whatever it may be, remember this thread.

You don't have the experience we have. It's actually quite easy to destroy us, if you know how to do it, and considering the complaints on here about tanks, only a sad few actually know how to destroy us. If it takes a tanker to write out how to destroy us, you're doing it wrong now, you did it wrong before, and you'll probably continue to do it wrong until you reach that eureka moment, when you and 2 people beside you destroy a tank in 3 seconds. Until then, you'll vainly try to solo the best tankers in the game.

Also, the huge majority of us are in skirmish and domination, not ambush. When you say "tank" and "ambush" in the same sentence, I want you to take a few minutes and think really hard before posting a reply / threat with those words in the same sentence. The guys that habitually tank in ambush are the ones worried about KD/R. The rest of us just want to win and kill a few infantry along the way.

You don't tank.

I've heard that those who tank in ambush, do poorly when it comes to skirmish / domination / faction warfare / planetary conquest, because they don't have to worry about much in ambush. In the other modes, they have to worry about the world trying to kill them.

Remember what I said before you complain about tanks. We not only have to deal with your PRO gear, we have to deal with stupid blue dots as well.

Late Edit:

This is what happens when you shoot a tank with a rifle. Remember that.

The only logical counter argument is that infantry have MLT / STD, ADV and PRO suits. Why can't we have ADV and PRO hulls?

You know...what if they introduced mobility-kills to tanks. Toughened up their armor and shields (make them overall harder to kill) but easier to disable (destruction on treads or the generator/engine on the back). When the HAV is disabled, it essentially becomes a stationary turret (easy to destroy with powerful demolition charges, but still a major force in the immediate area)...repair tools repair the damage only when the tank's armor returns to full (or introduce a structure health bar like there is space-side to be replenished).

you couldn't be more wrong. i want tanks. just not the solo god like killing machines that you want. and why should it take a team to take out a tank that can solo. that is not balance. thats as one sided as it gets.

if it took 3 people to operate the tank and 3 people to take it out then thats an acceptable balance.

LOL You cannot be serious. The cameraman stayed behind the wall. There's characteristic smoke trailing RPGs. Everybody knows that. Then, in the next edited shot of the tank being destroyed (it's edited because it's 2 different cameras, and therefore suspect), there's no smoke trail. Plus, it's a Russian tank, not American or British. Like the AK-47, they mass produce things to send them off for other peoples' wars.

So no, that video is highly suspect.

I have a question, if one person with an AR can simply shoot a tank to destroy it... What's the purpose of even having a tank? According to you "this is acceptable balance".

You keep complaining to make tanks weaker , yet you never once ever explained how a tank should be operated? Cowering from 300+ meters away because encountering any AV means instant destruction?(this example is made using your models not the current ingame settings)

If tanks were weakened to the point that a single AV player could blow it up before it gets close enough to engage... What's the purpose of a tank? It has to be able to take a beating of some kind as it approaches because it can't hide anywhere and everywhere like infantry can. Tanks cannot hide period! It's literally impossible to loose track of a tank because they can be seen from the areal map.

Basically tanks exchange all the defensive benefits that infantry have for a bit of armor and firepower.
So if a tank can't have that what is it supposed to do?

Youll grasp at any straw you can wont you
Want me to post a deluge of videos or do you want to save me the time and just search "RPG vs tank" in youtube

Youll grasp at any straw you can wont you
Want me to post a deluge of videos or do you want to save me the time and just search "RPG vs tank" in youtube

Once again an infantry, non-tanker seeing it from a one sided perspective. The above makes sense and actually is the direction CCP is moving according to the dev post.

My tank being temporarily powerful is NOT a burden to you. Likewise, you not being able to take it out at your early convenience is NOT a burden.

A tank is not like infantry and should not have to deal with multiple deaths and recalls just to get two shots in.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6qHL7jET8Gc

Since someone mentioned posting video of people actually dying Im trying to limit it to test videos for now but theres a deluge of stuff from syria as Im sure you understand

Inb4 "herp derp thats not an rpg" You are right, its a step up and more akin to what the game is actually giving us

Hey look, we arent even 4000 years in the future and already blowing up tanks like no tommorow, theres nothing even left of this thing and it can be used while sitting behind a cozy wall.

I think ill grab one of those for my equipment slot, thx.

i made no mention in any of my posts that a single person should be able to take out a tank let alone with an AR. i also have never made any points to make tanks weaker. i also made no mention that tanks should be one shot by av.

Another neophyte tanker QQ thread...

Good thing noob tanker tears aren't real or they would have caused apocalyptic flooding.

Another neophyte tanker QQ thread...

Good thing noob tanker tears aren't real or they would have caused apocalyptic flooding.

dead wrong, your posts on making tanks require a driver and separate gunner make tanks extremely weak. you cannot way that youv never said anything on making us weak when you say that we should require a random bluetard to operate our personal investments and effectively kill tanking altogether.

dead wrong, your posts on making tanks require a driver and separate gunner make tanks extremely weak. you cannot way that youv never said anything on making us weak when you say that we should require a random bluetard to operate our personal investments and effectively kill tanking altogether.

where did i mention that.

i made no mention in any of my posts that a single person should be able to take out a tank let alone with an AR. i also have never made any points to make tanks weaker. i also made no mention that tanks should be one shot by av.

no. you assume that. that was a basic idea with no numbers. it also stated increasing ehp which is a buff and requiring 3 crew which imo is also a buff as you can see more and kill more. the mechanics behind the idea were flawed some but the idea was to emphasise the need for crew in order to justify its combat effectiveness. also that has nothing to do with this post

at least i am putting a little more thought into the problem even if it is drastic and completely different that what everyone is used to. ideas evolve into something that works or they die through constructive criticism. in a tankers eyes if its not a buff to tanks and a nerf to av then its bad for tanking.

also when something is in an idea stage then nothing that is currently in use has any relevance on it.

You don't tank.

You don't have the experience we have. It's actually quite easy to destroy us, if you know how to do it, and considering the complaints on here about tanks, only a sad few actually know how to destroy us. If it takes a tanker to write out how to destroy us, you're doing it wrong now, you did it wrong before, and you'll probably continue to do it wrong until you reach that eureka moment, when you and 2 people beside you destroy a tank in 3 seconds. Until then, you'll vainly try to solo the best tankers in the game.

That first "AR" was my spell check messing up"AV".
You stated in the post I quoted earlier that a tank shouldn't need a team to take it down (aka 2 or more players clearly indicating a solo job)

You also never answered how tanks should operate. Instead you tried to skip the answer by making accusations. Many others may be easily distracted but I'm asking for explanations.

you missed the point of the quote. the point i was making was if a tank can solo and it takes more players to take them out then that is not balanced. 3 av taking on 1 tank with a full crew would be balanced but tankers wont allow crew in their vehicles or allow balance to compensate for not having crew.

well this is the 1st game in history for the console that allows players to take control of machines that normally AI programs would have, so yeah, shouldn't be soloed by anything under proto AV or another tank. we are NOT AI, we are players like you.

Hey look, we arent even 4000 years in the future and already blowing up tanks like no tommorow, theres nothing even left of this thing and it can be used while sitting behind a cozy wall.

I think ill grab one of those for my equipment slot, thx.

We're uh..................................................................................................................

At least 20,000 years into the future from what I've been told by EVE players.

God tankers are so bitchy its funny. Here's the thing yes a tank should be this massive asset on the field for the team, not for 1 guy. Tankers want their cake and to eat it too. They want to be this massive influence on the field SOLO. One guy should not be able to wipe out everyone around him uncontested just because he spent more isk than the next guy. This just leads to everyone running tanks because its the only viable thing. If you want to run a tank solo it has to be only slightly stronger than a solo merc, and I say slightly stronger due to the fact they cost so much. If you want a true tank, a killing machine on the level of the M1 abrams you are going to have to multicrew your tank. This means driver only drives, gunner only shoots, and support gunners only run support guns. The more complex and team based a tank is the more powerful it can be due to the fact it requires more people to be effective.

So by that meaning if you want to run a solo tank expect it to be paper thin, if you want a strong tank expect to have to run a crew of people. This is balance and this is fair.

What the hell are you talking about? Dust is definitely not the first console game that lets players control a tank while infantry runs around and fights

translation: dust tanks are meant to be **** and strong tanks will not exist.

my translation : solo tanks are meant to be **** and tanks with a crew should be awesome

lol, no

translation: dust tanks are meant to be **** and strong tanks will not exist.

please enlighten me on what game allows you to put personal investment in anything besides infantry.

If CCP only takes input from tankers, we'll have god mode tanks where the only counter for a tank is another tank.
Infantry are not only on the recieving end of a tanker, but they carry the AV that is meant to take down tanks, they should definately have a say. Majority of the players in the game are infantry anyways, cut them out of the loop and we'll have Vehicles 514.

Translation: Tanks can be extreamly powerful if crewed correctly and require more investment than just SP and ISK to use. Also from your statement, and previous statements you are one of those people who just want to drive around in your metal death box and laugh at people who did not invest in tanks. Seriously man think about balance not your own personal wants.

You cant really tank Void seriously, he got angry at someone and declared they werent a real tanker because they blew up another tank using a militia tank and good tactics like attacking from the rear
According to him the only want to tank is out in the open facing each other and you guys dont start shooting until the count of three

when a rail turret kills all with 1 shot, when a blaster turret kills a player in 1-2 hits. yet you in your tank can and do often survive 4 or 5 hits before blowing. its only when people are tired of your stomping that they turn to av and its never a single av player its always more.

and you say we have no right to say what happens with tanks.

if infantry are not allow to comment on how tanks should be then what gives a tanker the right to tell us how av should be

this is essentially what the whole argument comes down to

You cant really tank Void seriously, he got angry at someone and declared they werent a real tanker because they blew up another tank using a militia tank and good tactics like attacking from the rear
According to him the only want to tank is out in the open facing each other and you guys dont start shooting until the count of three

To non-AV guys making vehicle threads:

You don't AV.

You have no idea what it's like to see a third of your PRO swarms swerve into hillsides or simply vanish on the way to a target. You don't know what it's like to see a third of your Lai Dai throws "miss" because their guidance systems aren't as reliable as some tankers assume.

You don't AV. Stop thinking you know how it's supposed to work.

It takes less than 300,000 SP to get a Sica which takes more than 3 Haywire Wiyrkomis. Fact

You don't know what it's like to have to deal with blue dots that want to jump in front of every Swarm volley you fire. They get indignant that you won't use an AR like they do.

You don't AV.

So what do they do? They park LAVs in your path. They melee you when you're lining up a shot

I've skilled into at least standard tier of everything, and I still think almost all of the tankers are too selfish-
on the forums, you only fight for what gives you the biggest advantage, rather than what's best for the game as a whole.

Making them cheaper is infinitely better than making them even stronger.

His score doesn't bother me so much as he is complaining because he feels like he should have easily gotten a better score lol.

He killed 18 guys and lost nothing, and he is ******* crying about it!

So are we to refer to tankers as pilots now? Cause NO. Pilots fly. Tankers drive. Even in space.

So what because some people don't drive tanks we should have no say in their development, despite the fact its a part of the game that affects everyone?

While I agree the view of some non tankers is a bit irrational, you cant expect to sit by and allow you to overpower tanks, becausethat iis the view of some tankers.

Its about a little give and take!!

Sorry for arguing semantics. I'm sorry. Hope you see there is nothing wrong with calling yourselves tankers though.

please enlighten me on what game allows you to put personal investment in anything besides infantry.

It seems the "tankers" want to go back to the supertanker days during closed beta. Sorry tanks have always been vulnerable to a single person with a RPG. LIke always.

Tanks are called tanks for a reason. Massive suppression, massive firepower, and enough HP to take some damage before needing to run away.

So it's all about the WP? For merely suppressing a tank, there's no reward? Maybe you should petition CCP to put in Battlefield-like rewards.

To non-AV guys making vehicle threads:

You don't AV.

You have no idea what it's like to see a third of your PRO swarms swerve into hillsides or simply vanish on the way to a target. You don't know what it's like to see a third of your Lai Dai throws "miss" because their guidance systems aren't as reliable as some tankers assume.

You don't AV. Stop thinking you know how it's supposed to work.

It takes less than 300,000 SP to get a Sica which takes more than 3 Haywire Wiyrkomis. Fact

You don't know what it's like to have to deal with blue dots that want to jump in front of every Swarm volley you fire. They get indignant that you won't use an AR like they do.

You don't AV.

So what do they do? They park LAVs in your path. They melee you when you're lining up a shot. They make you think you're taking fire and panic-launch Swarms on the wrong angle. They throw grenades at you. They shoot you some more. They run you over in their LAVs to prove they can teamkill.

Every weapon but a Swarm Launcher counts as a direct threat to us. I remember during every build, seeing AV guys dying to ARs, Shotguns, Sniper Rifles on a regular basis. That obviously did not happen when in a vehicle.

---

You can't, as a pure tanker, tell the full story of how vehicle vs. AV should work, because you're biased. You've only played one side. Yes, the opinions of tankers, Dropship pilots, and legitimate NON-MURDER TAXI LAV drivers are valid and important. But so are the experiences of the grenadiers, Swarm guys and Forge Gunners who hunt those vehicles down.

Way back in E3, when tanks were arguably at their most powerful, and inarguably at their cheapest (with SIcas and Somas being handed out LITERALLY FOR FREE), I started out as an AV player. I ran Swarm Launchers, and I got pretty good with them. Back then, you could use Swarms for anti-infantry - they could be dumbfired and would explode on impact. No homing against anything but vehicles, but they were still a credible threat. I rarely used them in that way, preferring to save my limited ammo supply and switch to my trusty SMG when confronted with a soft target. I was, as an AV player, interested in the discussions of vehicle vs. AV balance, and I said my piece from what I believed was a well-reasoned perspective. I forget who it was, but someone made a thread much like this one, and I thought about it quite a lot. I created an alt, and I got into tanking for myself. I learned to drive (and I still want the optional L2/R2 LAV scheme on tanks, because shoving it all on the sticks is a horrible idea) and I learned to build a tank. I've sat and watched as Shield Tanks went from underpowered to overpowered and back, as Missile Turrets were broken OP, then "fixed" via nerfing everything at once until they stop doing anything, then fixed into moderate usefulness again. I know that vehicles and AV both need work, and I know this from experience on BOTH sides of the argument, not just one.

There are too many people on both sides of this problem who seem to think CCP can fix everything by only addressing one side. They can't. We need more tankers who are willing to listen to the AV guys, and we need more AV guys who realise that vehicles pilots/drivers know what we're doing too.

Can't we all just get along?

I do hate it when swarms hit things, so guided instead of lock on would be cool.

Anyways, This is just funny to me. Spark is taking is a little too far, but he does have a point. The infantry scrubs with no skill into vehicles should have a say, but when they speak like they have been lately, they should be shut up honestly.

I've skilled into at least standard tier of everything, and I still think almost all of the tankers are too selfish-
on the forums, you only fight for what gives you the biggest advantage, rather than what's best for the game as a whole.

Making them cheaper is infinitely better than making them even stronger.

You don't tank. ==> I have tanked.

You have no idea what it's like to see a third of your armor melt away from one volley of PRO swarms. You don't know what it's like to see a third of your armor melt away from one packed Lai Dai. ===> Yes i do.Even more than you,because my tank fit sucks a**... You dont know what it is to shoot 5 proto swarms at a tank, and leaving them with 5% HP,but its too late, he run away.Now you need to restock/reload/hope no infantry will see you. And hope for the best.

You don't AV. Stop thinking you know how they're supposed to work.

It takes less than 300,000 SP to get Haywire Wiyrkomis. Fact. ===>Thats not a fact.LOL you need 300000 SP JUST to get the LEVEL 5 on Swarm Operation. You are forgetting ALL the other levels , Proficiency.Of course dropsuit + modules+ equipment...So no.


You don't know what it's like to have to deal with blue dots that want to get in your tank for half a battle. They get indignant that you won't give them anything to shoot at. ===>I know . but this is another issue that CCP should grant vehicles users the ability to KICKa player from the vehicle they bought.


We don't have ADV or PRO vehicles.===>Nor you should have them,EVER....

Driver and main turret operation cannot be split up, because we do not rely on blue dots. The culmination of however good any of us are is the direct result of observing how blue dots are, which is useless, and knowing who in our squad we can rely on. We use the terrain to our advantage. We use range to our advantage. We use the time it takes to reload to our advantage. We use speed to our advantage.==>Same goes for AV then. If you dont want to use teamwork, TO DEPEND ON YOUR TEAM, then why do you feel teamwork is NEEDED to take tanks down? If you want to solo , then AV'rs should be able to solo too.

I absolutely will not rely on a blue dot I do not know to man my turret, because I'll be damned if I'm going to let a random drive my tank. Splitting operation would be the absolute worst thing CCP could do for tanking, and would destroy it completely. As a result, most tanks would probably biomass their character and either start going full infantry, or just never play this game again.===>Agreed.

You don't tank. You don't have experience tanking. ===>I have tanked, im not saying im great at it.


What happened when everybody complained about contact grenades. They got nerfed into the ground. Next time a tanker complains about AV grenades, make sure you remember what I said about infantry contact grenades.
Double standards ==>ACtually NO. Contact grenades were PAY TO WIN for a long time. 1 HKOd Proto suits. Doesnt matter the AV nade. i cannot 1HKO your tank with it.PLUS the fact that the situation/positioning of the AV in order to effectivley hit a tank ultiple times to kill it is very precise. If you are getting killed by AV nades,you are doing it wrong.

Contact grenades are/were the only thing that homed in on infantry. We have to worry about swarm launchers, which track us for 400m before automatically terminating. When they hit, they hit hard, really hard. Wiyrkomis hit for around 7000 damage against armor before having to reload, if all 3 volleys hit.===>IF ALL 3 VOLLEYS HIT. You are not tanking into consideration damage reduction modules nor the insane regen capability Tanks have I have hit a tank With all 5 volleys of my proto Swarms ( 1 of them hit a building) and guess what? HE LIVED.

Contact grenades got nerfed. AV grenades haven't.==>AV nades shoudlnt get a nrf.

Terrain damages vehicles. Not so much anymore for infantry. ==> Agreed thats bullcrap.

Next time another non-pilot makes a thread about tanks, whatever it may be, remember this thread.===>Its funny. YOu might have used AVs in the past. BUT YOU ARE NOT AN AV SOLDIER.Yet you do give your opinion on everything AV related dont you? but you think someone who DOESNT tank 100% of the time cant give his opinion on tanks? Talk about bad logic...


Remember what I said before you complain about AV. We not only have to deal with OTHER infantry,your SPEEDY tanks that can take our Proto AV weaponry and RUN away to heal or kill us,BUT we ALSO have to deal with stupid blue dots as well.

YOU DONT AV. DONT EVER TALK ABOUT AV AGAIN IF YOU DONT WANT NON TANKERS POSTING ABOUT TANKS.

Late Edit:

THIS IS WHAT AV weaponry does to vehicles... WITH ONE SHOT
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UFyXRktIAgo

we do know what's it's like to see all of our armor and hp disappear from tank blasters and rail guns.

Who are you to tell me i dont tank?
Sure , my MAIN is not tanker, i did a different one for that.

but you run most of the time tanks that doesnt make you an AV specialist, same as me playing 10% of my time as a tanker does not make me a tanker.
OH,and swarm launcher op level 3 is not having PROTO SWARMS lol.

If you changed the swarms into wire guided missiles with either no change to damage or even a slight buff to damage would take a good step to making av more skill based, number of times I have had av turret rockets winged around corners in PS2 is astronomical. Laser guided would be good too. But I have to ask what makes me a scrub about the fact I have very few points in vehicles? I have no interest in driving vehicles myself unless they are in a support role (MAV's and LLAV's caught my eye), Infantry needs a way to counter vehicles and we have that, though it might be a wee bit too strong at the moment.