Passive reps need a nerf in general, either through straight efficiency or through a hefty stacking penalty. Then give us back activated reps. Activated reps at least take a tiny degree of thought and skill on the part of the operator, where passive reps are just lolherpderpiminatanklulz

Ahem, whats that sentinel running? 5 armour plates, 5 armour plates, 5 armour plates
What do you expect tankers like heavies are more concerned about themselves than helping their team.

In additionmyou only have a fraction of total vehicle modules and CCP have yet to state they are happy enough to the next stage. 500HP/s is ridiculous you cannot deny, the fact that people are stacking so many reps just shows the general tanker attitude.

I shouldn't die, because I'm in a tank

I personally like this one

Highs
1x Scanner
1x MCRU

Low
1x Proto CPU upgrade
1x Advanced Plate
1x Proto Repper

1x Large Missile Turret

Quick question, when was the Large Blaster designated "Anti-Infantry"? The Idea that a large cannon being designed as an anti-infantry weapon strikes me as something inherently unbalanceable. I'm not saying they shouldn't pack a punch against infantry just that I wouldn't expect a large gun to be as nimble at tracking the movements of small ground troops as accurately as they do.

I always thought they were the anti-shield av cannons (a niche that is under filled right now), and the small turrets were the obvious assumption for anti-infantry capabilities.

I don't know what you are smoking man. Proto die all the time to militia. That's a reasoning used by AV to bring attention to HAV bias about you feeling proto weapons should scratch you unless grouped in numbers.

How about you dig up posts where infantry have said a proto dropsuit shouldn't die to a militia. I'm curious if you can actually find one, for everyone I know that has played the game knows this to be a simple unavoidable fact.

The state of tanks since their reboot in 1.7 has been very sad. The way CCP keeps going about things leaves only one viable way to tank at a time. What they need to do is make every style of tank viable. A dual hardened tank should not be the obvious choice over everything else. A triple repping tank should not be the obvious choice over everything else. Every style should have an area to excel in but not stomp over ALL. A jack of all trades tank (1 x hardener, 1 x repper, 1 x plate) should be useful in many situations but not great at any.

It's really not all that different to infantry but even there we have problems with bricktanking being the go-to fit for everything.

We need more rock paper scissors situations in all areas of this game and between tanks vs tanks, ADS vs ADS and infantry vs infantry as well as everything inbetween.

I'm not crying about triple reppers or dual hardeners or anything like that. It's just saddening seeing one type of vehicle out there and must be boring for those players who are running the same thing every single game. I wished they'd not nerfed hardeners like they did but applied a repping penalty to them instead. I wish they'd bring back active reppers at the strength of current passive reppers and make passive repping much lower. I don't want anything to be obviously weaker than anything else - I want everything to have its place and be useful in the right situations; not ALL situations and not NONE either.

Wyrkomi Swarms, plus Damage Mods, plus the Proto Suit costs 150k+ each (anything less is ineffective and basically pointless).

Probably about half as much as a tanker's suit + tank but, then again, that tanker's basically got an extra life. Think of it as the necessary expense to wear what is essentially two suits. One (the tank) that has an insane amount of hitpoints and firepower compared to my AV suit, that you can jump out of just before it is destroyed and continue playing, and the other (your Dropsuit), that you can continue to be effective in once your tank is gone.

If I take even a fraction of the damage that your HAV does, I'm dead and respawning. You can take a ton of damage and hop out, still at full health and ready to continue fighting, at which point you should have zero difficulty finishing me off, since I'm standing there with a weapon that doesn't work against Infantry.

HAV pilots also have a ton more survivability compared to their AV counterparts. They have a ton of hitpoints, tons of firepower that can be effective against Infantry AND other vehicles, and are immune to one-hit killers like Snipers or SG Scouts, while the AV is vulnerable to everything on the field while their attention is on the HAV.

AV tend to die much more than the HAV pilot so, if I had to guess, I'd say that our overall per-match expenses are close to, if not more than, that of the HAV, while our end-of-match payout is significantly less.

When was the last time you saw an AV go 10-1, or 15-2, or 20-0 in a match?

When was the last time you saw a tanker top the scoreboard?

NAV HIV is the one who brought ISK into the argument, not me. I just pointed out that running an EFFECTIVE dedicated AV is not a profitable venture, by any means (potentially less so in the long run than running an HAV).

Sure I can run a cheaper fit, but I'll probably only make a few damage points. I certainly doubt I'll be destroying anything less than militia LAV's with basic swarms, but I might turn a small profit at the end of the match (nowhere near what the slayers or Logis or HAV drivers will, though).

But, if I want to even have a chance at putting a dent in any significant HAV, I'll have to put full Proto on the line every time and, considering how many threats there are to me while I'm shooting at the HAV, the risk just isn't worth the potential reward and, while I might cost that HAV driver msome money, I'll also be losing money myself in the process.