All the comparisons with Eve are essentially irrelevant from a gameplay perspective for one very simple reason.

Eve doesn't have a cap of 16 players per side.

Both of those need to happen along with 1 seat per gun + 1 seat for the driver. IMHO, zooming around the ground of the battlefield should be the sole domain of the LAV (and perhaps the MAV when we get them). HAVs should take forever to get somewhere, but once they do you're in for a world of hurt if you're in their range.

Another thing, concerning the turret ranges. Ranges of Turrets should mirror the ranges of similar weapons of that tier. MLT Railguns should have the same basic range as a MLT Forge Gun (which IMHO should be called a Forge Shotgun since that is about all of the range they get). MLT Blasters should have roughly the same range as MLT HMG.

Even then, range should increase by size (or rather decrease by reduction of size). If the MLT 80GJ Rail has the same range as a MLT Forge Shotgun, then the Small Turret versions should have 1/4 the range of the 80GJ since it is a 20GJ gun.

Though this would also mean that the PRO 80GJ Rails would have the same range as PRO Forge Guns (which is stupid long range AFAIK), as well, PRO 80GJ Blasters would melt anything within 30m or so (not entirely sure on optimal of the HMG since I am only a tourist with it).

So you only every play with Spkr? You never play with anyone else? There are no new players who you might want to help out or teach the ropes to?

What infantry can claim to have 6000+ EHP with hardeners that practically make them immune to nearly all incoming damage?

Comparing Infantry running solo to HAVs running solo is like kittens to adult male tigers, it is a ridiculous comparison that has absolutely no merit since, 1:1 the potential of the HAV >>>>>>> the potential of Infantry. If your HAV only had the same fitting stats and EHP as a dropsuit; or the Infantry had the same fitting stats and EHP as an HAV, then it would be a reasonable comparison.

The two do not equate in the slightest, not from a perspective of cost or stats.

So the only reason you'd deny this as a balancing factor is that you like driving and gunning and don't want to have to choose one or the other?

I never said that it should require 2+ 30m+ SP players work, just that it should take more than 1 player to be truly living up to its full potential. You assumed that I meant it should take both you and Spkr, I only said Spkr since I know that if both of you are on Dust, you're both in the same squad.

While I will not deny that there is a large portion of stupid infantry in Dust, I can't believe that you are so blind to the disparity between Vehicles (specifically HAVs) and Infantry. Seriously, I find that to be mindboggling to such an extent that you must either be trolling or that you view Dust as WoT with infantry ants for you to squish.

Personally, as far as AV is concerned, I feel that had vehicles been buffed to where they are now and AV left untouched, we would not have this disparity we currently have.

Believe it or not, I do want HAVs to be a factor in Dust, though not to the extent that, were it not for Objectives that required infantry to be hacked, Infantry would be an nonfactor.

English, are you purposely being obtuse about this? I mean, how can you think that there isn't anything wrong with the current state of Vehicles in Dust? I remember playing MAG with you and utilizing APCs as a part of the whole, not as the whole itself. We used teamwork with vehicles to compliment both styles of play, yeah we bitched when some stupid bluedot got in the Turret and gave away our position but the point is that we didn't solely rely on vehicles to the exclusion of infantry gameplay.

Do you really care so little about this game that you'd rather the vehicle playstyle either becomes the only reasonable choice or the playerbase burns out on vehicle spam and moves on to other greener infantry pastures (thus killing the game)?

Either way, if that is really how little you care about any playstyle other than the Vehicle playstyle why are you even here? AFAIK, there is better vehicle gameplay here, here or (coming soon) here. Any of which are also free and would give you the OMA vehicle FFA gameplay that you so obviously desire.

English, do you not wear a dropsuit inside that HAV? I am willing to bet you do, even if it is a bpo suit with nothing more than a bpo gun.

My point is this; you chose to spend 20m+ SP on something that amounts to a second dropsuit encasing your first. The assault with 20m+ sp invested in being infantry isn't choosing to invest sp in a second dropsuit with potentially the room for three. This is why he spawns in with only room for one in his dropsuit and absolutely zero potential to have anyone else to join him in that dropsuit. Tankers want that second dropsuit with that second set of weapons which is why you need to spend that extra SP on HAVs.

Infantry can't bail from their dropsuit when they get deep into armor, tankers can.

Infantry can't achieve 6000 ehp or more, tankers can.

On foot, infantry cannot achieve the speeds that HAVs can.

No single light weapon or even heavy weapon can achieve the raw damage output that HAVs can.

What is the drawback to being encased in that mobile battlestation/panic room?

I'd be willing to bet that HAVs are vastly more complex than dropsuits as well. Infantry are designed and intended to be able to solo. HAVs otoh, have the potential for multiple operators and accordingly have a higher potential to fulfill.

Dropsuits individually achieve their maximum potential with only one operator (this can be enhanced through teamwork, though this isn't 100% necessary for dropsuits to achieve their full potential individually).

HAVs are possessed of vastly more potential in many areas, in order for them to achieve their full potential, they should require multiple operators. The thought that a single operator can unlock a vastly greater amount of potential by themselves is silly and absurd. Since HAVs are force multipliers that bring much more to the table than 4 infantry can, I don't find it unreasonable for them to require 4 operators to achieve their full potential.

They aren't solo pwnmobiles and shouldn't be despite how much you want them to be. If you want to solo in your HAV, you should be restricted to the potential achieveable by any single infantry