DUST Search - The Role of HAVs

Garth Mandra wrote:

I agree that HAVs don't seem to have a good role.

I'm not sure what that role should be though. As an infantryman I'm not keen on the invincible rolling death machine that a few of the tank players advocate for as it doesn't do anything that infantry can't already do (although it does it better while being a bigger target).

Dropships and LAVs have obvious transport roles.
A APC type troop carrier would have obvious roles in transporting, spawning, healing, supplying, boosting infantry.
Fighters would be anti-dropships vehicles (dropships would need more impact to make them worthwhile).
Bombers would probably be large area denial and/or anti-ground vehicles.

But what about tanks?
-"Breaking through enemy defences" sounds like destroying installations to me but installations don't play a large part in the games at the moment and blowing them up sounds like a terribly boring activity.
-"Supporting infantry" tends to mean killing enemy infantry (or scaring them so they hide) which is a role I would prefer to give to heavies and heavy weapons.
-"Destroying other vehicles" is a fine role but not terribly useful with the small imparct of LAVs of Dropships at the moment. Without other roles tanks killing tanks is a closed system.

Perhaps if turrets were serious threats to infantry?
If turrets flipped with null canons (or some other area control panel) instead of individually then disabling them would help infantry take an area.
If the turrets couldn't be permanently destroyed, just temporarily disabled, then that might give tanks more to do.

Just brainstorming.


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Oswald Rehnquist Abandoned Privilege General Tso's Alliance 348	Posted - 2013.10.29 06:36:00 - [1] - Quote Someone phrased this best, but the new roles of HAVs are what was described as 2 min / sporadic battering rams with how active modules are going to change. So HAV pilot main role is essentially going to function as stall breakers.
Oswald Rehnquist Abandoned Privilege General Tso's Alliance 348	Posted - 2013.10.29 06:43:00 - [2] - Quote Ulysses Knapse wrote: Oswald Rehnquist wrote: Someone phrased this best, but the new roles of HAVs are what was described as 2 min / sporadic battering rams with how active modules are going to change. So HAV pilot main role is essentially going to function as stall breakers. Hmm... I want a capacitor system, damnit! There is nothing preventing another round of vehicles changes but I think after this one the other roles need CCP's attention first though.
Oswald Rehnquist Abandoned Privilege General Tso's Alliance 348	Posted - 2013.10.29 06:49:00 - [3] - Quote Garth Mandra wrote: I agree that HAVs don't seem to have a good role. I'm not sure what that role should be though. As an infantryman I'm not keen on the invincible rolling death machine that a few of the tank players advocate for as it doesn't do anything that infantry can't already do (although it does it better while being a bigger target). Dropships and LAVs have obvious transport roles. A APC type troop carrier would have obvious roles in transporting, spawning, healing, supplying, boosting infantry. Fighters would be anti-dropships vehicles (dropships would need more impact to make them worthwhile). Bombers would probably be large area denial and/or anti-ground vehicles. But what about tanks? -"Breaking through enemy defences" sounds like destroying installations to me but installations don't play a large part in the games at the moment and blowing them up sounds like a terribly boring activity. -"Supporting infantry" tends to mean killing enemy infantry (or scaring them so they hide) which is a role I would prefer to give to heavies and heavy weapons. -"Destroying other vehicles" is a fine role but not terribly useful with the small imparct of LAVs of Dropships at the moment. Without other roles tanks killing tanks is a closed system. Perhaps if turrets were serious threats to infantry? If turrets flipped with null canons (or some other area control panel) instead of individually then disabling them would help infantry take an area. If the turrets couldn't be permanently destroyed, just temporarily disabled, then that might give tanks more to do. Just brainstorming. I agree with making offensive installations a serious threat, even fortress like, but tanks as a way to break infantry is literally the only IRL role of tanks. That is equivalent of advocating a gun that doesn't poke holes in people.