That's not the primary reason, as stated. It's user experience and completely new concepts for players coming from other fps's.

Agreed with Pokey, players learning this game already will have to become familiar with damage profiles and having exceptions to the rule will hurt overall learning as the players will have to learn the rules (for infantry) and exceptions (vs vehicles)

My main concern there is that the overall complexity will increase, not decrease, due to players already having to learn the rules, and then having to learn additional exception rules.
Ex:
Current Learning Load: Weapon Profiles vs Shields and Armor
Proposed Learning Load: Weapon Profiles vs Shields and Armor, Except for Weapons X, Y, Z.

That said, without the weapon line up to justify it, the imbalance of Shield vs Armor tanks will always be unbalanced while there exist a large disparity between means to fight 'vs shields' against 'vs armor'. So for the current meta game balance, I think this approach would be more beneficial, but long term (assuming new weapons to balance numbers out long term) the damage profiles should remain.

So you would want to swap to a shield swarm and back to an armor swarm as AV infantry?

Pokey said
(Additionally as for the benefit of faster balance iterations, I believe that in most cases you should assume neutral damage when it comes to calculating overall DPS. Damage profile (obviously with some minor adjustments) works itself out in the end. Some weapons will simply work better against certain targets than others....that's how all weapons in this game work, infantry and AV alike. I don't think that it's unreasonable to ask someone to bring the right tool to get the job done either. I mean if I have a Laser Rifle and come up against a heavily armored unit...I'm going to get my ass kicked because I didn't have the right tool for the job. I don't see why AV needs to be different.)
Luther say's
Hmm the Laser Rifle sucks ,Amarr commando sucks hate to say it but their weapons explode damaging themselves.
My Amarr frigate lasers haven't exploded in Eve yet ,Why have them explode in dust.If being like Eve is smart what happened to Amarr?

damage is just an efficiency to be balanced.

The aiming, sure but drawing a bead on something, while exposing yourself to enemy infantry at the same time, while maximizing damage by being far from the vehicle seems to outweigh a lot of the pros

Pokey

damage per individual shot = [BaseDMG + (scalar * # of shots fired consecutively)] * damage mods

Scalar ranges from .85 on basic to 1.10 on proto I believe, with the number of shots capable of being fired ranging from 60 - 80 on basic / proto or up to 120 consecutively on officer laser (which might have a higher scalar).

So for a basic at its 80th round 17 + (.85 * 80 = 68) = 85. A basic laser with amarr assault 5 and no damage mods has a damage per 'full burst' of 4114, the officer laser with its 120 rounds goes up to a damage per 'full burst' of something like 10 000, before damage mods.

Watched 5 guys all with AV try to take down a proto tank.

The 5 AV guys lost. Tank went 32/0.

3 swarmers and 2 forgers.

I grabbed my forge to help. I'm no slouch when it comes to hitting tanks.

So now its just a ridiculous barrage of swarms and forge shots. I've never seen anything like it.


The swarms and forges didn't budge the tank after his hardeners were up. Tank retreated, rushed in, killed everything he could until his time was up and repeated.


Fix this garbage. Hardeners shouldn't render the tank invincible for 30 seconds. It's insane how good the hardeners work. Sort it the **** out.

Sincerely, everyone that isn't a tanker.