I'd say give the Forge Gun a faster recharge time.

Although, I think a MLT/STD LAV should be 1 shotted by a Lai Dai Packed AV Grenade. Not 3.

Pretty much nailed it on the head though. Good Job

I think if AV nades got a big multiplier VS LAVs and dropships then that would solve the issue of them being too OP vs tanks.

Look, Cody is not asking for Derpships to be OHK'd by AV grenades.

He's just asking for them to do more damage to them than what they currently do.

If every AV weapon is an AV support weapon, what is the primary AV weapon? An MLT tank with a railgun? Sorry, just noticing a fatal flaw with a lot of logic that i have seen from you. Please revise your argument, unless your current position is that an MLT tank with a railgun should be better AV than prototype Swarm Launchers or Forge Guns.

And the plasma cannon requires more CPU, therefore it should do twice the damage of the railgun, and have a 9 shot clip. Also it is larger than the swarm launcher, and put on the shoulder to fire, which means that it has more kick than the forge gun, and thus should have like 5 times the damage. Also, they require a drop suit to put them on, so it makes sense that they should do more damage than any other AV weapon in the game.

EDIT: Just in case it was incomprehensible, this was a semi-satyrical post attempting to apply your logical explanation of why certain weapons must be more powerful by utilizing your exact points, but with a different weapon, the plasma cannon. Please redefine your argument, as it has been invalidated, or acknowledge that you concur with me

I would simply like a summary of your main points so that i may continue to refute them.
So far, the information that I have gleaned from your post about why a railgun should be exponentially better than any other anti vehicle weapon in the game isGǪ

1. Plasma Cannon CPU usage is very low, allowing it to be fitted as a small turret (please report back to me the CPU usage of the prototype non-specialist cannon, as I am certain that if you attempted to fit one or more of these on a tank as well as modules, you would be sorely disappointed)
2.The plasma fired from a plasma cannon does not move as fast as the railgun shell, so because of this, the plasma cannon shot, which has much more kinetic molecular energy, and is compressed inside of a magnetic field, causing increased pressure should be less efficient, where in reality, a railgun shot is useful for destroying tanks because it moves so fast that it pierces the tank shell and destroys the interior electronic and mechanical engineering. A mass of plasma that is being compressed should be incredibly potent due to its potential and kinetic-molecular energy, and would therefore completely obliterate any entity within the blast's proximity, if the mass/heat/pressure of the plasma were high enough. I know what I am talking about in this field, so please don't try to bluster your way through.
3. The railgun is a railgun, made with what is known in this game as rail technology, and has less than a second of charge time, so it should be better than an anti vehicle weapon with a 4+ second charge time that uses rail technology.
4.Self created conceptions about the game>Actual weapon descriptions and real life physics>AV/ tank balance

Please correct me if i misconceived any of these points, or if you have additional points to offer.