if i have everything unlocked for vehicles, i should not be 1 shotted by AV. why should a 50k peice of epuipment overpower a 2 mill tank? you arent using reason, your constantly discarding everything i represent and shoot the same thing at me over and over. is that all you can come up with? you know, you can pull out a madrugar with std missile turrets and kill armour tanks. you dont have to cower behind your crutch

sorry buddy but CCP banned takecover ordie. he quit caring and stopped playing dust because of this.

Because maybe a tank shouldn't cost 2 mil. We have suggested making tanks slightly cheaper!

And to use your ar example

A more expensive ar will beat a cheaper ar
but the worlds most expensive ar isn't gonna help against a sniper at 300m, or a tank

It costing more does not guarantee power outside of your class.

I retort with the same response because you keep giving me the same starting argument!
l know my argument works so why would I change tact against the same argument?

yet, not a single AV guy on here posted a good reason why they should be able to solo a tank. they just repeat over and over "i should solo a tank". and when i demand evidence from them, it takes them a hour to bring me a military link that clearly states tanks dominated AV. can anyone give me a reason? im still trying to understand. and dont say tanks are limited to only one person. you can use them too.

You're calculating this wrong. It should be balanced around the total amount of ISK in destroyed dropsuits/vehicles by tanks vs. total cost of tanks destroyed. I highly suspect tanks deal out more pain than what they cost. It's the ISK efficiency that should be important not the price of the counter. You have to remember that AV have to run a gauntlet of vehicles and infantry (especially enemy snipers) that mow down AV like its nothing. The only thing AV is good at is taking out vehicles, except you think instead of paper killing rock, it should be a stack of paper to kill a rock with rocks and scissors shredding paper like Enron.

Vehicles should be balanced around teamwork. CCP needs to fix vehicle remote repairing, so that tankers are going to want a remote-repping LLAV or dropship with them when they charge into the fray. I have no sympathy for players who want to deal millions of ISK in losses to the enemy solo, but expect to either not pay much for the privilege, or expect to be so indestructible that they can regularly do this solo AND TURN A PROFIT. That's crazy. If tanks need a buff (and I'm not convinced they do) then it should be a buff to supporting abilities of the tanks. A defender light missile turret might be cool to fit onto LLAV's for example with fitting requirements that make it difficult/impossible to fit on a tank or dropship. Give players WPs for taking out enemy swarms. Or there could be a wide energy beam that does no damage, but will cause missiles to prematurely detonate when they enter the beam's path.

I also want to see vehicle capacitors implemented. This will give skilled tankers/pilots more flexibility and opportunity to weigh their module activation choices. It also might help bring in EVE pilots to DUST.

As long as risk vs reward arnt balanced, then tanks need a buff.

2+ mil isk tank shouldnt lose to a 150k isk dropsuit solo.

Something that actually takes skill, massive amounts of SP and isk shouldnt lose to one guy sitting on a tower dominating everyone.

AV should not 1 shot a tankmbecause I have specced into them
AV requires the person to skill into AV to get proto, he has to go through more levels to get his av then you do for your tank

]

Lower the price of tanks then!
A 2.5mil worth of dropsuits should not loose to a 2mil tank then!
Or does that logic only work in one direction?

if there is one thing i hate more than cod its a unconstructive post and ive yet to see one like the one im about to reveal. the wars between avers and tankers needs to stop. avers want tankers easy to blow up and not worth speccing into. this means for you avers, if you get a buff and tanks get a nerf, you wont have anything to kill with them proto swarm or lai dai grenade. tankers, if we didnt have demented avers suiciding in our red line trying to kill us and keep us under locks, than infantry would be scarce and we wouldnt have anything to kill. if either gets nerfed to the ground it means we are screwed. nobody seems to see this but me.


as for my opinion of balance, wp should be given for every thousand damage you do to tanks but not devastate tanks and blow them to bits. its not right that a guy running solo grenades that cost 10k and a swarm at 50k can blow up a 2 mill tank so you really need to consider balancing av too. we already lose plenty when we face other tankers. i really hope ccp takes this into account with 1.6 pretty soon(tm), but we need proto tanks back if we are going against this becouse this is just sad. ccp you shoulda nerfed the blaster turret instead of the tank if it was that big a deal. if you get 1.6 wrong ccp, i fear most for you. you already lost most of your good tankers. now everyone has av and tanking is a dying art.

others feel free to leave comments and thoughts about this but please, dont act like a 8 year old and argue. this game needs balance, not brainless chimps throwing **** at eachother. and im a aver too so dont even try to critisize me.

BULL ****

Iv spe'c enough to run ADV swarms and a std nanohive and I can SOLO any tank on the field.

Lets see what skill we need to spec into to use AV vs Tanks

Swarm launcher or Forgegun, no more then level 3 / 4 respectivelly to take out any vehicle on the field solo


Tank

Vehicle / LAV / HAV / (optional enforcer)
Turret / Large turret / Small turret
Vehicle upgrades / armour plates / armour hardners / armour reppers
CPU / PG skills for CPU/PG moduals / Scanners / turret upgrades

Yeah real fair

Chase, Dunk., et all...

I have spec'd into AVs quite seriously. I don't drive tanks but I routinely volunteer to be a dedicated gunner & ground support for them. I also happen to have more RW experience with this than probably 99.5% of the folks playing the game.

My opinion, for what that's worth, is that vehicles vs AV equipment is actually fairly balanced (some exceptions to this at the proto level) and the ultimate leveler is the skill of the tanker vs the skill or numbers of the opposing team.

A decent tanker with some dedicated infantry support (even if it's just two guys that gun in turrets and dismount to disrupt AV or swarm on other tanks) is extremely difficult to stop with out a large portion of the opposing team stopping everything they are doing and focusing on the tank team. Solo tanking can be tough since you lose situational awareness. You dominate what you see in front of you but what you don't see is the swarms coming from your 6 or the AV grenades coming from your flanks.

Chase - as to your direct question above. It should be possible (notice i didn't say easy) for a single focused player that has spent the appropriate time, SP, and ISK to solo kill a tank. If the player is approaching the tank using cover, blindspots, ect. and can take advantage of the equipment and weapons with their optimal ranges and engagement angles there is no reason that it shouldn't be possible. The single biggest threat to a modern MBT is a motivated and undetected guy or two with a high end anit-tank missle. Once the element of surprise has ended and the AV guy or team hasn't killed the tank then the tank will know where you are and it's a whole different story.
(quick edit...you might not be seeing how many times that would-be AV guy dies to get the single tank kill)

Tanks, high end fighting vehicles, helos (read: dropships) that cost exhorbitant amounts of money are routinely heavily damaged or destroyed in modern war (Iraq & Afghanistan). Quick note...the "80 tanks" destroyed weren't the only tanks destroyed. That's just the number sent back to the States; the number of vehicles taking major damage that rendered them combat ineffective for periods of time but were reparied in theater is much higher.

I guess i don't understand why people think the AV vs Tank question is about fairness. Not throwing rocks at anyone i just don't understand it.

1. High end vehicles are expensive and have incredible potential on the battlefield- as they should be.
2. The counter weapon for infantry is cheaper but puts the infantry at high risk and requires they exclusively focus on the vehicle target- as they should be.
3. The tactic to negate both the tank and the AV guy/gal is teamwork - as it should be.
4. A driving force in Dust is game mechanics that encourage teamwork.

If I'm looking at the this wrong let me know, seriously.

I guess I come down in the camp that you certainly shouldn't be able to OHK a tank but you should be able to solo kill one with some effort.

I got up to you thinking that WPs can effect it's balance.

WP's have nothing to do with balancing.

Period.

Was it miltia?
The fact you NEEDED a nanohive means the tanker was an nitwit to stick around for so long.
An I must point out you really need a suit worth its weight

Finally I had yet to pull the argument about swarms being incapable of use against infantry, which you seem to overlook so easily.

to your last statement, all other tanks took minor damage as said in the hyperlink. reasons were not included. also may i ask, what real life experience do you have as a tanker? mind you tanks are very different from being part of a assault team so if thats what you meant by experience, then i shall discard that.

16+ years Light and Heavy Cavalry, Long Range Reconnaissance & Surveillance, and other activites not apporpriate to mention. 49 mo's combat time, still on active duty.

The problem is there's a HUGE SP gap from being an expensive pinata waiting to break, and a well fit tank.

Tankers see the solution to this in the form of massive buffs.

Massive buffs would make tankers starting out more viable, but makes a well fitted tank into a mechanical god.

Tankers either refuse to see the consequences of buffing tanks, or are simply ignoring it to make their weapon of choice stronger.

I've also noticed people assuming because its a tank, that it can "tank" damage as if this were an MMORPG. Clearly that's the logic of a fool.

Duran - thanks.

You point about the upfront cost helped a great deal. High initial entry for viabilty but to give scale up attributres it would create very significant 2nd order effects in game balance. My initial reaction is to give them the buff but limit the number HAVs that can be called in...not a good or "fair" solution either.

16+ years Light and Heavy Cavalry, Long Range Reconnaissance & Surveillance, and other activites not apporpriate to mention. 49 mo's combat time, still on active duty.

nice. mind sharing some stories later? would be interesting.

If I have a decent amount of SP into AV nades and I engage a tank in a city setting where I have boxes and stuff to hide behind and or enough cover to sneak up behind a tank, then yea, I should be able to solo a tank. The tank had no business being alone in that setting, and doesn't need a buff because of the results.

Tankers can solo all they want in Pubs, and they don't dominate. Yet most Tanker QQing seems to be in relation to Pubs, so I am naturally confused.