Victor Moody Stahl
Amarr Templars
Amarr Empire
23
   |
Posted - 2014.10.18 23:26:00 -
[1] - Quote
I just want to comment on the Logi LAV part... or rather, why Logi LAVs are a fundamentally flawed idea.
First, let's define the Logi LAV. I'll use the historical concept, as well as a little bit of EVE design philosophy. The idea behind the Logi LAV seems to have been a ground vehicle that could be used for remote repairing (IE, "logistical") support for both infantry and vehicles.
To that end they were able to more easily fit remote repair mods, had resistance bonuses to enable them to survive on-field, and a turret damage reduction to discourage exploitation of the resist bonuses to make them unstoppable deathwagons. Of course, we all know what happened with that- the era of the Murder Taxi in its "I run people over" incarnation.
So, obviously not exactly a good track record. But I'm sure everybody's wondering why the Logi LAV isn't just a difficult to balance vehicle, but is actually flawed from concept to execution.
It's pretty simple. What, exactly, is a Logi LAV supposed to support? Is it infantry? Is it vehicles? Because on the whole it ultimately didn't do either very well. It was generally too fast to properly move with other ground vehicles- and infantry especially; the crew were exposed to all kinds of enemy fire, and it was generally accepted to be nigh-impossible to actually lock on to pretty much anything with the remote repair mod it came with.
So we end up with something that outruns the assets it's supposed to support, but exposes its crew to excessive amounts of enemy fire in either application- but especially in reference to infantry support. Which then leads us to the fact that the risk/reward of Logi LAV usage is broken- either it's too risky because you're more likely to be shot out of the vehicle than actually be helpful, or again, it's too risky because the Logi LAV is too fragile to support friendly assets (such as Logi LAVs providing remote reps in an HAV battle), or it is too risk-free in unconventional uses... like the hated Murder Taxi.
Ultimately what we end up with is the conclusion that something with greater durability- and less mobility- that also has a fully enclosed chassis is significantly more desirable than a Logi LAV. Call it a "Logi MAV", then. Such a vehicle would probably range between slightly faster and as fast as an HAV, but is much more durable than an LAV and is also fully enclosed. Our theoretical Logi MAV would likely have substantial transport capacity, enabling it to carry a squad. This squad, once dismounted, would then be supported by the remote repair functions of the vehicle... in theory, at least.
Obviously, our Logi MAV is also more capable at supporting HAVs; it isn't going to outrun them nearly as easily as a Logi LAV, and it's going to have much greater ability to remain on-field to provide those highly desirable remote reps.
Of course, this now then brings up a very interesting question- is a Logistics vehicle even something that could be well-designed to provide remote repair to infantry? Or would it be the case that Logi vehicle support to infantry comes in a different fashion, like mCRU spawns, or vehicle scans.
Overall though, I think it's pretty clear that the Logi LAV is flawed, and should be completely discarded. It's almost certainly too hazardous for infantry support, and it's more likely to outrun its HAV brethren than it is to support them- even if it's on accident. |
Victor Moody Stahl
Amarr Templars
Amarr Empire
25
|
Posted - 2014.10.20 01:08:00 -
[2] - Quote
All I'm going to say is that I think I've pretty well covered why Logi LAVs are simply a platform that is fundamentally flawed and will never perform well at its intended function- especially not without making it more desirable to use it in unintended, and generally hated, ways.
Though to append my previous thoughts on the matter, I will say that perhaps the greatest flaw of the Logi LAV is that it just can't carry very many passengers- having only a driver, gunner, and passenger. Compare this to a typical derpship with a whopping six passengers (2 gunners+4 warm clones), in addition to the pilot.
Even an ADS is more capable of transport functionality with four passenger seats. |