Bump

how quickly you forget all those matches you were in where tanks stomped you and there was not a JLAV in sight....

you sir have no credibility....

No I haven't forgotten them.

JLAVs shouldn't be the be-all end-all AV solution to tanks. Was I pulling JLAVs? No, I was pulling out swarms and AV grenades and even had some success at pushing back some tanks. I decided to skill into swarms, not remotes.

JLAVs are low risk, low investment, high reward. If you have a BPO LAV, each attempt costs you 0 ISK. But you can destroy upwards of 700k ISK with a JLAV. What makes it even worse is that it's an unforeseeable OHK. I only played a few battles today so only one JLAV blew me up, but it was enough where I barely made any profits today. I only heard it a split second before I blew up. I reacted to the sound of the LAV and went to activate my hardener but I was already blown up.

JLAVs are not a fair tactic. Until I can slaughter infantry (which I don't by the way with XT-201s) at little risk and with low investment (like 50k ISK, not 500k ISK), only then will I see JLAVs as an even AV tactic.

It just makes me sad and annoyed when I blow up peoples' vehicles with my missiles (because that's what they were f***ing designed to do) that they switch to a JLAV and blow me up, because they couldn't win against me in a fair encounter. I still get JLAV'ed just for being on the field. I'm not any more dangerous to infantry than a militia free suit is against a full proto suit. Only if you're being stupid will you get killed, but then your stupidity isn't an excuse to use a JLAV against me.

I can also kill a 200k proto suit with a 0 isk dren suit...

I can kill aproto with 1 1500 isk remote...

I can run over a proto with a bpo lav

I can blow up a tank, ads, and infantry with a 0 isk 0 investment stationary turret on a map....

should we remove all of these possibilities too? no? then why the JLAV?

do you see how petty, shameless, and inconsistent this QQ request is?

You can't compare killing proto suits cheaply to killing tanks with JLAVs.

Free suit vs proto suit is more like militia fit Sica against proto fit Gunnlogi. If the Gunnlogi loses, well it got outplayed or it just sucked.

Sure you can run over a proto with a BPO LAV. It probably wasn't enough to make him go negative for the next couple of matches though. And if he's smart he won't let you run over him again.

Turret installations are well known. If it's red it's dead. Or yellow... it's still dead. It's a pilot's own fault if they leave a red turret installation. They should've known that it's red.

You bring up weak arguments for the defense of JLAVs. I think you just don't want to have to actually work for it and risk an AV suit trying to blow up a tank. Risk vs reward. If you want to blow up tanks so easily, then you should probably invest in a full proto AV suit.

A JLAV is the reverse equivalent of the murder taxi which could 'death tap' any infantry and instakill them, while being able to tank better than a tank and has much higher mobility. You infantry cried for their removal. I think it's only fair that JLAVs don't exist either.

JLAVs were introduced in 1.7 as an apparently unintended byproduct of the change to REs. At the time the vehicle armour hardeners all but prevented dangerous damage being dealt to HAVs; this left the JLAV, usually stacked with prototype level equipment (because otherwise there just wasn't enough damage for success), as the only real viable means for AVing outside a tank.
For that reason I, and many other members of the HAV community, accepted them as necessary for some form of balance.
Time passed and hardeners were nerfed. Forge guns were now somewhat viable, but the power of the rep-tanked Madrugar meant that JLAVs were still the most effective tactic for dealing with those tanks, and so we bit our tongues.
Now the armour repairers have been nerfed; as well as Large Blasters being less effective for attacking infantry, infantry AV is, as a general rule, in a very good place at the moment.

Consequently, I think the time has come to formally request that they be removed.
The JLAV is a low-ISK high-reward tactic; indeed, for much of the community it entails zero risk. It is difficult to counter short of hiding in the redline at the peak of a hill, owing to the speed and manoeuvrability of the LAV, and should it strike you there is no possible way to survive, short of a max-tank hardened Gunnlogi (the fittings being 2x Complex Heavy Extenders and 1x Hardener, and 1x Complex Heavy Extender and 2x Hardeners).

It is akin to the much-reviled 'bumper dropship' in its near-zero investment reward, and is actually much higher reward owing to the enormous number of vehicle damage points it brings.

It is also alike to the old 'murder taxi' of early Uprising, particularly considering the near-free reward those had, and to the current 'LAV Heavy', which is similarly low-investment, low-skill high reward.

I hope you'll make the right decision.

we aren't playing the game by your rules... the points I laid out are similar to the jlav, low isk, low risk ways to kill expensive things... period... with in the rules ccp devised these things can happen and jlavs are just another type of these low isk high reward mechanics.

no bpo is not like militia.. militia cost money you specifically pointed out that a bpo lav makes it a 0 isk investment... so is a dren... its the same.

just like running over a proto with a bpo lav... it doesn't matter if he didn't lose as much money as you, it is a 0 isk item taking out a high isk item

you speak of sp investment, and turrets cost none or isk and they kill everything as well....

just because you don't like my points you cant dismiss them simply because you feel that since it isn't exactly a tank vs a jlav it doesn't count..

you are absurd and you fail to see logic only because you don't like the tactic.

but I countered every reason you think it should be removed with a similar mechanic in the game.

stop embarrassing yourself...

Wont happen

Infantry wont allow it

The removal of the JLAV is a buff to vehicles and also stops lazy players who have 0SP invested in AV

Cant buff vehicles thats bad, only nerf

No.

Your post betrays an absolute failure of comprehension.

In no possible way is dying the issue here.

If you read my OP you would realise exactly what my attitudes to 'dying' are. They have nothing, and I repeat nothing to do with losing the ISK.
I am fully aware that by bringing my vehicle onto the field I risk losing it. I have been insta killed by forge guns, I've misjudged my enemy and been destroyed, I've simply scrubbed up and lost a particle cannon to a Sica.

REs are 'legit AV'. REs strapped to a LAV for zero investment should not be.

Every time I pull my tank onto the field I risk between 250 and 600k.
In the same way, every time I bring my AFG onto the battlefield I risk between 60 and 150k.

If I was to use a JLAV it would be literally free, and have a far more definite outcome.

You call this a 'risk and reward' game.
This is bleedingly obvious. What should also be bleedingly obvious is that a JLAV skews that 'risk vs reward' enormously.


But hey. "It's a sandbox". So how's about I get back my Charybdis and we return the collision damage to what it used to be? No?

You people sure do love to contradict yourselves.

At least it's not double standards, which infantry always seems to have.

Don't you remember when you cried to remove free murder taxis and nerf the collision mechanics? Yet, infantry is defending the use of JLAVs. Please just shut up.

Oh, I see. So only infantry have double standards eh? That's funny, because I do recall a bunch of vocal vehicle users claiming that it should require teamwork to kill them but dismissed any suggestion that it should require teamwork to make vehicle effective at killing infantry.

Forgive me, my memory doesn't seem to be up to par. Please do remind me of that time "I" bitched and moaned about these murder taxis. And while you're at it, do tell me of these other things that you've assumed I've said.

And because you asked soo politely, no. Poking people of your... intellect is too fun. And besides, you took your precious time to reply to me. It would be awfully rude not to do the same.

Tell me when you're AV teamwork was nerfed because I can distinctly tell you when my teamwork got nerfed.

And I still don't get why infantry feel that one FG on a roof should be able to deny most area's of the map for all tanks and the methods you infantry suggested of teamwork was impractical and would ruin tanking while you AV thought it should take teamwork for us not to be solo'ed.

ROFL
You do realize they nerfed LAV collision damage because it was OP and removed the infinite amount of LAVs they would give you because it was unfair that 0 ISK could easily flatten a proto suit.

Da fug what game are you playing because in DUST 514 all turrets cost ISK and I have 6 mil sp split between the 3 turrets, I consider 20% of my sp an sp investment.

You just want to protect an easy mode crutch.

No.

Your post betrays an absolute failure of comprehension.

In no possible way is dying the issue here.

If you read my OP you would realise exactly what my attitudes to 'dying' are. They have nothing, and I repeat nothing to do with losing the ISK.
I am fully aware that by bringing my vehicle onto the field I risk losing it. I have been insta killed by forge guns, I've misjudged my enemy and been destroyed, I've simply scrubbed up and lost a particle cannon to a Sica.

REs are 'legit AV'. REs strapped to a LAV for zero investment should not be.




Every time I pull my tank onto the field I risk between 250 and 600k.
In the same way, every time I bring my AFG onto the battlefield I risk between 60 and 150k.

If I was to use a JLAV it would be literally free, and have a far more definite outcome.

You call this a 'risk and reward' game.
This is bleedingly obvious. What should also be bleedingly obvious is that a JLAV skews that 'risk vs reward' enormously.


But hey. "It's a sandbox". So how's about I get back my Charybdis and we return the collision damage to what it used to be? No?

^ See double standards. Clearly argues that vehicles should not be taken out by a solo AV user, but not once did he mention that a lone vehicle user should be less effective at killing infantry. Thank you Benjamin for proving my point that even vehicle users have double standards.

When was the last time you saw a missile/railgun tank slaughter infantry? We have gunners to combat infantry, AKA TEAMWORK

why is it only dedicated tankers complain about this?

when I stick 2 remotes on my lav and leave it somewhere to be hacked so I can blow it up with the hacker no one complains.

when I stick remotes on my bumper and run up to an enemy lav with a drive by heavy, jump out and set the remotes off blowing them up... no complaints

when I put a ton of remotes on my lav and drive right into a group of reds jump out, and blow everyone up... not a forum peep.

when I run up to a tank and stick remotes on it and blow it up... no complaints.

but I put remotes on the lav and run into a tanker and the tears ocean flows....

tell me how this is more than just an "I don't like being killed this way" thread.

you talk about risk vs isk... but when I kill a proto in my dren fit no one cries... how is this different?

I actually disagree with you. I understand your side of the story and that a blueprint LAV loaded down with an entire suite of remote explosives that are rather cheap can blow your expensive tank sky high.

But why shouldn't it? Tankers are generally cowardly players. I feel like that's half of the motivation behind skilling your character into a tank. Its people who are worried about their kill death ratio because they can't deal with losing (at a video game where everyone wins and loses on a consistent basis)

I have zero tank skills. I have never had desire to have tank skills. I don't have dropship skills either because I want to be in the thick of it, up close and personal with you guys duking it out and seeing who the better man is. Sometimes its you, sometimes its me. Its fun.

Flying in the sky and dropping death from above or rolling around in a big armored "look how big my shag-stick is" vehicle and going 70/0 in a game or camping objectives (both tank/dropship) is a cowardly move.

So why not roll a Jihad LAV right up to the tank and blow it....want to know a really smooth tactic? Its one that I use...I get the LAV going as fast as I can make it go....I can judge how far it'll roll once I jump out...I hop out, watch it go...I can switch to my remote detonator quickly and POP! Tank goes bye bye.

Tanks are annoying. They enable cowards to be cowards. I understand your call to arms to remove the jihad jeeps and I will support you on that when you also make a call to arms to remove the ability for players to be cowards.

You can rip opponents out of Titans in Titanfall, but I can't hop on the tank, open the hatch and shoot you in the face like the cowardly little terd that you are? Oh but you can shoot me in the LAV while I'm driving (I personally love that lol)

Do you see my point?

Its different because with your dren its just like a sica killing a proto tank. Wouldnt you be mad when you got insta killed by an sg and went isk negative for 3-4 matches. Putting RE's on a tank is like sneaking up on a tunnel visioned gatling gunner. If they know youre there your dead or they're gone. I dont bother that i lost my tank im pissed because it was lost to some retards tactics because he was to scared to shoot av at me.

Man you took the words right out of my mouth. The moral here is Tanker=Cowardly fool
BTW you can get LAV BPO's?

When was the last time you saw a missile/railgun tank slaughter infantry? We have gunners to combat infantry, AKA TEAMWORK