13-16sec TTK is quite terrible when considering in the past 30sec and upwards of towards a minute were standard HAV vs HAV times in uprising.

I feel that AV should not hit harder or faster than a HAV at all.

if 13-16sec is for AV then you can half that for a HAV which is terrible and boring and twitch.

30sec should be the minimum battle time between HAVs and for AV add on 15sec more.

Buffing AV should be out of the question unless you want to kill off the other vehicles because if you want AV ti kill in 13sec then DS/ADS/LAV will all get creamed before they come out of the redline.

You keep talking anecdotal opinion and ignore the fact yhat my numbers for TTK basically require that the AV gunner be God's Gift to tankbusting of for the tank to be driven by an oblivious idiot.

It assumes somehow the AV gunner can put all of his shots directly on the HAV without interruption, interference or cchance of missing.

Swarms are NOT included in my TTK delusions or recommendations. They are problematic at best and I refuse to touch them to use or for balance suggestions unless a mechanical rework is on the table.

But if an HAV driver ALLOWS an AV gunner to hammer him nonstop without interference (even if that's moving behindcover and siccing squadmates on him) then he deserves to die.

You should see my recommendations for the UHAV. I'm pushing for 14,000 EHP vs. Infantry AV. With AV balanced to combat MBTs running between 6,000 and 9,000 HP with difficulty solo.

But keeping the UHAVs somewhere around 6-9k versus tank turrets.

I don't care if other infantry will think it's unfair. I think it'll be hilarious.

And my fully skilled, triple modded, maxed out AV guns cap out right around where an unskilled, unmodded railgun starts at for DPS on rattati's scale. So no. AV will not be better at killing tanks than tanks do if I have my way.

You keep talking anecdotal opinion and ignore the fact yhat my numbers for TTK basically require that the AV gunner be God's Gift to tankbusting of for the tank to be driven by an oblivious idiot.

It assumes somehow the AV gunner can put all of his shots directly on the HAV without interruption, interference or cchance of missing.

Swarms are NOT included in my TTK delusions or recommendations. They are problematic at best and I refuse to touch them to use or for balance suggestions unless a mechanical rework is on the table.

But if an HAV driver ALLOWS an AV gunner to hammer him nonstop without interference (even if that's moving behindcover and siccing squadmates on him) then he deserves to die.

You should see my recommendations for the UHAV. I'm pushing for 14,000 EHP vs. Infantry AV. With AV balanced to combat MBTs running between 6,000 and 9,000 HP with difficulty solo.

But keeping the UHAVs somewhere around 6-9k versus tank turrets.

I don't care if other infantry will think it's unfair. I think it'll be hilarious.

And my fully skilled, triple modded, maxed out AV guns cap out right around where an unskilled, unmodded railgun starts at for DPS on rattati's scale. So no. AV will not be better at killing tanks than tanks do if I have my way.

Just because you two want to have everything and compromise nothing doesn't require the rest of us to be on board or cooperate. But sure, keep banging on the Surya bus when you two are literally the only people on this forum who buy into the idea that the surya wasn't overpowered.

And I don't care about the chrome surya. Rattati has opted to not go with my recommendation to go back to chrome basis for vehicles and AV. I've moved along, and really don't care about what you think things should be, I only care about what they are versus what they will be.

But you two are welcome to try and stonewall everyone else, because it's been kinda amusing watching you bang your heads on the wall.

Just because you two want to have everything and compromise nothing doesn't require the rest of us to be on board or cooperate. But sure, keep banging on the Surya bus when you two are literally the only people on this forum who buy into the idea that the surya wasn't overpowered.

And I don't care about the chrome surya. Rattati has opted to not go with my recommendation to go back to chrome basis for vehicles and AV. I've moved along, and really don't care about what you think things should be, I only care about what they are versus what they will be.

But you two are welcome to try and stonewall everyone else, because it's been kinda amusing watching you bang your heads on the wall.

You keep talking anecdotal opinion and ignore the fact yhat my numbers for TTK basically require that the AV gunner be God's Gift to tankbusting of for the tank to be driven by an oblivious idiot.

It assumes somehow the AV gunner can put all of his shots directly on the HAV without interruption, interference or cchance of missing.

Swarms are NOT included in my TTK delusions or recommendations. They are problematic at best and I refuse to touch them to use or for balance suggestions unless a mechanical rework is on the table.

But if an HAV driver ALLOWS an AV gunner to hammer him nonstop without interference (even if that's moving behindcover and siccing squadmates on him) then he deserves to die.

You should see my recommendations for the UHAV. I'm pushing for 14,000 EHP vs. Infantry AV. With AV balanced to combat MBTs running between 6,000 and 9,000 HP with difficulty solo.

But keeping the UHAVs somewhere around 6-9k versus tank turrets.

I don't care if other infantry will think it's unfair. I think it'll be hilarious.

And my fully skilled, triple modded, maxed out AV guns cap out right around where an unskilled, unmodded railgun starts at for DPS on rattati's scale. So no. AV will not be better at killing tanks than tanks do if I have my way.

14,000 eHP is not enough for an "ultra heavy tank." They should start at 14,000 eHP, and increase from there. Rattati hinted at needing a laser strike to take them out.

So unkillable unless a squad of six is working together and gets basically 1 shot at dropping a Laser Strike per match. I know it's not quite the same in PC, but you do realize that you would almost never die in pubs right?

I would love to play in the same pubs as you Pokey, I have a fit near 10k ehp currently that often pops in 4 seconds fully hardened. So excited to dump another 10 million sp into vehicles so i can tank that extra forge blast before the militia swarms pop me. Lol @ 1 Hardener.

Tanks without nitro will be terrible unless they have over 20k ehp. Otherwise I will need to find whatever server you are on that only has one red berry that ever uses AV.

Balancing tanks around ONE AV player crippling a tank with ONE clip is rediculous.

I would love to play in the same pubs as you Pokey, I have a fit near 10k ehp currently that often pops in 4 seconds fully hardened. So excited to dump another 10 million sp into vehicles so i can tank that extra forge blast before the militia swarms pop me. Lol @ 1 Hardener.

Tanks without nitro will be terrible unless they have over 20k ehp. Otherwise I will need to find whatever server you are on that only has one red berry that ever uses AV.

Balancing tanks around ONE AV player crippling a tank with ONE clip is rediculous.

Well you're assuming AV is staying the same, which it is not, so....

And I don't think a single AV player should be able to cripple a tank with one magazine, that is ridiculous.

EDIT: Let me clarify. I don't have an issue with HAVs gaining extremely high eHP. I do have an issue with them having it constantly. Back in the day my typical fits had 3 hardeners which I would typically cycle to have a near constant hardened state. However if **** hit the fan I could pop all 3 at once and my repper and make my eHP skyrocket to tank through just about anything, but then suffer from a lengthy downtime. I would much prefer that sort of model where you either have the option to run in a hardenened state for a longer period of time, or flip them all on if you really need to tank through some nasty AV for a short time.

This is really my primary gripe with the way the design went, and it was made even worse with the 1 hardener limit.

Your tank or tanking skills must be gawdawfull if you die in 4 seconds.....

Yes that would be ideal, guess I was hoping this was what we were heading towards... instead of just making 'fast tanks with low ehp' and 'slow tanks with slightly more ehp than we have now' while nerfing defenses and regen.

Yes i try and teleport away but can't remember the button.

Yes i try and teleport away but can't remember the button.

Gee that sounds super complicated, tanks go backwards?


On a serious note, AV infantry sometimes wait till you drive past them to step out of a building, sometimes there two behind you, sometimes they have friends up on towers.. try coming out of your redline now and then on north American servers.

The more I'm looking at this, the more I'm seeing it as an all around vehicle nerf, save for the slight madrugar buff.

same.. more slots= more isk = surviveability as now.

Well you're assuming AV is staying the same, which it is not, so....

And I don't think a single AV player should be able to cripple a tank with one magazine, that is ridiculous.

EDIT: Let me clarify. I don't have an issue with HAVs gaining extremely high eHP. I do have an issue with them having it constantly. Back in the day my typical fits had 3 hardeners which I would typically cycle to have a near constant hardened state. However if **** hit the fan I could pop all 3 at once and my repper and make my eHP skyrocket to tank through just about anything, but then suffer from a lengthy downtime. I would much prefer that sort of model where you either have the option to run in a hardenened state for a longer period of time, or flip them all on if you really need to tank through some nasty AV for a short time.

This is really my primary gripe with the way the design went, and it was made even worse with the 1 hardener limit.

I hate NA servers.
nothing but proto and proto swamrs, most with minmando.

I thought you disagreed with that statement?

I was thinking more......drive away through a clear escape route you left yourself and was not too far from?...... I've been driving all morning and seen some really nasty AV combinations..... and just reversed away.

That's not to hard is it?

Gee that sounds super complicated, tanks go backwards?


On a serious note, AV infantry sometimes wait till you drive past them to step out of a building, sometimes there two behind you, sometimes they have friends up on towers.. try coming out of your redline now and then on north American servers.

Why do we get a increase in slot layouts but we dont get our old modules back? Where is the fitting variety? Its just going to play out like this for shield tanks:

-shield hardener
-2X extender
-2X boosters

Similar situation is going to happend with armor tanks and many people proved this allready. If you allready are going to add the old vehicles back then add those modules back into the game:

-passive shield/armor resistance
-shield recharger (not booster!)
-overdrive modules (increased torgue)
-logistic modules for armor/shields
-PASSIVE damage controll unit
-heat sinks, tracking modules etc.

Vehicle fits would actually have variety instead of just the overall generic stuff that every 1 uses. Im just baffled that this discussion is not going anywhere simply due to the lack of actually old vets who remember all of the old stuff.