I can agree, taht if a tank is controlled by multiple players it has the right to be that many times effective.

So i second Kaisar's idea.

What im against is 1 Man uber tanks.

I agree that vehicle pilots are a minority. But you have to admit the derpship pilots are the minority of the minority. While its always been tankers vs infantry.... we've had to struggle with derpships vs infantry and/or tankers.

I also agree that the ADS was nerfed too much. But it wasn't when the rate of fire or ab got nerfed.... It was long before that. Til this day I have yet to get a reason as to why the 2nd low slot was taken away. I can not stress how important that slot is for the Cal ADS or the 2nd high slot for the Gal ADS.

Yes they needed nerfs.. but now more than ever do they need that second slot. The OPness overshadowed that necessity... but now that the OPness is gone I hope that everyone can now see why I keep saying that we need that 2nd slot back.

I agree with OP that I enjoyed seeing and being a part of bigger tank battles, with escalation. I also agree that since we are having tanks in the game, there should be some variety, preferably some stone/paper/scissors. The entry point seems to be the most difficult, in "why do I need Tanks in my infantry game"

Maybe the Marauder can be that take and hold monster, that has small turrets and is incredibly difficult to dislodge and requires tank destroyer HAV's.

Right, right. It should come full circle.

Anti-Infantry Tank > Infantry
Anti-Vehicle Tank > Anti-Infantry Tank
Infantry > Anti-Vehicle Tank

EDIT: This might even be a golden opportunity to have an infantry role specifically designed for AV in which they get bonuses toward AV weapons and tools. Then other infantry options are also a threat to them while they are a massive threat to vehicles and we can solely focus on the balance between them.

The problem with vehicles, Is that there really has never been a true discussion that doesn't end up going the complete wrong way. Kind of like the way this post is turning out. Speaker does say some important things in his OP. He is expressing his opinions based on what he sees, experiences & shares with others. So, Of course, What he says will be tailored to his experiences.

You should all focus on the core of the issue: Vehicles being sub-par.

Not the physics of the game. Not whether or not Speaker has his lore right. Not past nerfs.

What can be done now? I will say vehicles have had their fair share of nerfs. So, No more nerfs.
I know the LRG Turrets need work before CCP decides to release our old tanks.

Also, People need to remember, The AV vehicles face now are going to be OP due to the fact all the vehicles only have up to STD hulls. That's PRO Tier Vs. STD Tier. So, Of course it isn't going to be easy anyways.

I do think ADSs got WAYYYY too much of a nerf. I think the afterburner is the only thing CCP should have nerfed. The turrets skill stacking, To me, Wasn't that big of a deal because the pilots who could do that were incredibly small in the community. Plus, To even effectively stack in the first place both the pilot & gunner had to have millions of SP specialized into Cal ADS/Gal ADS skills & small turret skills. Even if stacking was a major concern, CCP should have removed just the stacking & not nerf the RoF for the pilot.

Shields still need work. Collisions & uneven terrain can remove your shields almost better than AV. I still think every Caldari vehicle should get more passive resistances to Caldari Rails, Because its Caldari tech. I mean, Duh. Come on. Same should go for the Gallante & their blaster tech. But, I suppose this will have to wait until CCP reintroduce the Gal rail & whatnot.

Tanks. Okay, I can make fits to take on AV, But they suck Vs. other tanks. I can make Destroyers which are spiked. Sponge tanks. I can make tanks that have two mini cannons plus one LRG PRO Turret. That's basically it for fits.
It does feel like AV is overpowered, But I really feel like its cause I'm in a STD Hull while I'm being swarmed by PRO AV.
Now, If this continues when I get my Sagaris rollin', Then there will be a problem.

The only major issue I could even think that is broken, Is Jihads. I mean that crap can cause your Ps3 to freeze. Not cool.

For LAVs, I mean, I don't use them very much. Would like to see LLAVs about giving support to other tanks, But I feel like there just isn't enough players in one game to do that. It takes one noob army to compete against 1 squad of organized effort. So, I think the more I see them in pubs, The more chances our team has at losing if the other team has good players.

I miss my Eryx. :( & my Sagaris.... :(((((

Traditionally you do not make a technology that is designed to protect against your own weaponry..... you make one to protect yourself against your enemies technology.

Regardless he does say some valuable things even if a few are coloured by the bitterness of an old vet....but what both of you need to remember most of all is that any prospective vehicles we may have reintroduced must be balanced around the current PRO AV, and currently at this time there are some very obvious issues with the interplay between the two.

- Shield HAV are statistically superior in every respect to armour HAV
- Shield Hardeners are 15% more efficient than Armour Hardeners for no good reason, allowing for stacking abuse.
- Shield Passive Regeneration if far too effective for not having to fit a module allowing Shield HAV to fully regen in a matter of 20-30 seconds.
- Lack of Modules
- Explosive and Kinetic Heavy AV meta renders Armour HAV ineffective but means Shield HAV can ignore lesser AV.
- Fitting disparities between Shield and Armour HAV
- Shield HAV @ MLT and STD level have too much potential eHP for their tier.

Right, right. It should come full circle.

Anti-Infantry Tank > Infantry
Anti-Vehicle Tank > Anti-Infantry Tank
Infantry > Anti-Vehicle Tank

EDIT: This might even be a golden opportunity to have an infantry role specifically designed for AV in which they get bonuses toward AV weapons and tools. Then other infantry options are also a threat to them while they are a massive threat to vehicles and we can solely focus on the balance between them.

Did I mention you messed up Marauder and Enforcer HAV skill.

Marauder should have resistances.

No, I didn't get them mixed up.

That's not "full circle," that's infantry still devastating vehicles with still overpowered AV.

Yes, Yes you did.

I deliberately swapped the skills. I didn't get them mixed up.

I wasn't around for skirmish 1.0 but I love th idea of tanks playing a central role in destroying nulls. Shaping the battlefield is one of the few elements I miss from BF. If tanks could assault nulls and cripple them rather than destroying them, would that create the right dynamic to make players field vehicles for a reason beyond dominating infantry for lols?

Infantry AV should be a solid counter to tanks, otherwise what's the point? If my PLC can't knock out your average shield tank then I might as well just drop my own tank into the field and go from there because realistically nobody wants to be a deterrent; they want to be a counter. We build fits, both suits and vehicles, to fulfill a specific purpose on the battlefield. Success in that endeavour is then dependant on the players skill in the execution of that role whilst playing. If I fit my suit to kill tanks I want the game to be balanced so as to allow me to do that if I play the role well enough. Of course, proto fit tanks and superb tankers can prevent this, and that's great, but fundementally all weapons, and the roles they are designed to support, should be effective and fun.

And thats why a sica with a militia railgun, 2 militia damage mods, a militia hardener, and a militia plate is the best AV in the game available to an infantry player.

There is no reason to pull out a forge gun or swarm launcher when I can just call in a tank that does comparable damage (and much more damage with mods active) over longer range with less delay between shots on a tank that moves many times faster than a dropsuit and grants me invincibility to all the infantry which would murder my AV fits the second I start firing and reveal my location. Also the tank costs less money than an effective AV fitting (effective at being a deterrent, not at actually killing anything, because killing a vehicle isnt allowed unless you use another vehicle).

But yeah all the clueless tankers should keep whining about how good AV is. The only reason they really think its good is that it is one of the few things that isnt a tank that can kill them if they act stupid enough to take AV fire for 10+ seconds.

Because we act stupid when someone actually has a brain and gets behind us to use AV.

You can still one-shot a base HP tank in the rear end with a PRO breach forge, proficiency 5 in a Cal sentinel with 4 damage mods.

Wow, one instance that is incredibly difficult to pull off past 80 metres, and only works on one suit. Oh and that only works on gunnlogi. Stop trying to paint this picture that AV is this thing that can kill all vehicles with impunity because they can't.