Why does the HAV allow the driver to operate and fire the main cannon at the same time?

Perhaps an addition to satisfy both HAV operators and those who feel HAV operation should be a team effort would be to have a driver seat like the LAV.

A single operator would be completely protected as they currently are, but would have to switch seats to a turret to fire a weapon. Multiple operators would mean a dedicated driver and manned turrets, while solo drivers would have to stop moving and switch controls to attack a target. Retreat would then also mean switching back.

I believe this may offer a good dynamic.

Tanks are for killing tanks, or at least I think they should be AV focused, not infantry focused. Tankers should SUPPORT infantry, or in other words "SUPPLEMENT" not outright own them. Small turrets are there for AI purposes.

You aren't restricted on your suits like this, there is no reason a tank should be as well. But I agree, if it takes a team to kill a tank, it should take a tank team to kill infantry.

And what are tanks for, why to fight other tanks of course. I RARELY ever focus on infantry. Since this new build, my goal has been to kill tanks. I suggest that light turrets do the job of AI the best, so that a tank requires a team of people to take out infantry. But think about this, currently, a tank has to sacrifice Defense, in order to equip light turrets. So a tank that wanted the best AI would have to sacrifice D, putting him more on level with the infantry.

Do you want tanks to easily murder infantry???

Let's take the current rail gun for example. IT IS an AV weapon hands down. But on open map PCs where the points are open and exposed, a rail tank can hold that objective from a distance. Outside of that tiny niche, a rail tank struggles to kill infantry, but it's not impossible. Takes a bit of skill and luck. And just the other day, my buddy tanker blocked entry to an objective using his bulk so we could hack it. I then squashed the dude he blocked with my tank against his tank.

But anyways, you WOULD have sole operators in HAVs same as you have sole infantry and HAV's now. Sorry man but not everyone digs the team thing 24/7 (some of us are introverted). In all honesty, I don't think you fully grasp what it means to drive a tank. You make it seem as if no one would drive tanks if we moved more to an AV focus, but you fail to realize that many out there are LOOKING for tank vs tank battles. Winning or losing a PUB is pointless at this point. What we want are good battles within our own niche.

And dude, if you had a good tanker squad in a tank, they are only there to provide protected support. If they need to get out and deal with AV on foot or other infantry, they do it. You seem to think that once a blueberries in a tank, he's in there for good.

Dude, THIS is my idea.

I know I said AV focused, I know, my mistake. It seems to me that we are both on the exact same page. I suggested in my post on tank turrets of splitting the roles of say a blaster tank into AV or AI depending on the turret type. And when used, an AI is good at killing infantry, but it shouldn't be good against another tank, leaving them vulnerable, and giving purpose to an AV role tank.

At the same time, an AI tank needs to have some sort of disadvantage against infantry AV, as they are immune to small arms fire, and for an infantry to run AV they put themselves at a disadvantage to other infantry.

Way I see it, AV shouldn't have much of a chance against an AV dedicated tank, as damage is meant to supplement another tank. But in the same way, tanks should require infantry support to kill other tankers.

And if an AI large turret wants to supplement his AV or AI capabilities, he runs gunners. Same with an AV that wants some AI abilities while retaining AV capabilities.

This is clearly a misunderstanding, as I mistook you for the OP that wanted to split the roles of a tank to require 2 operators min. Looking back at your post I see that we are on the same page. What I mean with tanks being more AV focused, is that an infantry is at a rather large disadvantage when it comes to tackling a tank, where as a tank is immune to anything but AV. I would rather tanks not slaughter infantry so easily with an AI turret.

Currently, a blaster is FAR too strong against your normal infantry, and even AV infantry crumbles to a good blaster tanker. My point being, an AI turret shouldn't kill like they were on foot, because they have limited vulnerability as opposed to the infantry.

Sorry for the stress fella, I think we are arguing when we should be discussing how to go about different turret types, and what kind of drawbacks should be associated with said turrets. Same with modules, as well as adding positive attribuites, I would like to have some negatives to using them as well.

You might think that the only nerf to tanks that this change would entail, is one of opportunity. You would ONLY see tanks being called in when the tanker had a known gunner/driver, as the chance for griefing (loss of control) with a system like this would be huge.

Modules would not be operable from the gunner's seat, that would be silly. So a 'solo lol' operator would be at a huge disadvantage to AV and other tanks, aside from being griefed or having curious newberries assume control of either seat.
So it would be a direct nerf to tanker (invested SP player) play style and experience.


This change would not achieve what you think it would:
To accommodate this change, the driver camera would have to be separated from the main turret. This would increase tank survivability via greater situational awareness. Any tank in "fire mode" with a dedicated gunner, would see the driver scanning for threats and pre-aligning to viable escape routes. Fleeing tanks would continue to fire, overall tanks would become better at tanking and killing.

I greatly suspect OP, that you have only considered the first idea i have mentioned or maybe the second. At the first of a change like this, yes we would see a decrease in tanks. Over time though, you would find that dedicated tanker teams would emerge, and that their tanks would be harder to kill and far more deadly than current solo tankers.

Are you aware for instance that the driver and turret operator skill sets overlap as regards turret bonuses?

if it stays the same or changes its not a real biggy for me, i have access to a large social subset, and i find myself undecided over which playstyle i might prefer... i have actually suggested this myself in the past.

edit: typo

ADS is a solo profession until you have the fittings skills to fit more (of the decent meta lvl) guns to its sides-as well as keeping a decent tank. ADS is also anything but unwieldy. Standard DS, yes they are like steering blimps, but they are also easier to fit, so their lack of acceleration actually makes them better gun platforms for a team.

I think CCP needs to get onto a medium ground assault vehicle asap if there is going to be a separation of roles for the HAV. Give the MAV a large fixed turret or something, but do it so as not to disenfranchise a portion of the player base or destroy a playstyle.

...anything that encourages variety can't be a bad thing in a 'sandbox' style game.

I would rather see large turrets be shifted completely into the role of anti-vehicle. One man controlling a tank is fine, but a tanks infantry killing ability should come from it's sturrets.

The tank problem would literally go away overnight if large blasters were reworked into an AV role instead of AI.