I agree with the OP, currently Light Attack Vehicles see little use because they are massively overshadowed by the heavy vehicles. As he says, they can do everything an LAV can do and better. They're also hardly slouches in the speed department when they want to make a quick getaway.

Making them tougher isn't really the answer as then they're just Heavy attack vehicles with a smaller profile, but turning them into something else than an attack vehicle is an excellent idea.

1: You could have truly mobile spawn points with the vehicle acting as a spawn point. A way to co-ordinate an attack and quickly flank an enemy that had pushed you back to limited spawn locations.

2: Mobile cover generation - Vehicles that could enter a hardened mode where they become completely immobile but are virtually indestructible as cover for people behind them and providing resupply.

3: Counter-measure deployment - support for larger tanks where the LAV has Chaff or some other form of countermeasure to neutralise tank-buster weapons. Allow them to act in concert with the bigger tanks.

4: Mobile e-war - Semi-Permanent active scanning/scanning protection etc.

There are probably other uses that could be found for them, but there are four. Obviously care would need to be taken to ensure that you couldn't use them to block off objectives and the like, but as the OP says, they are currently just not worth taking if you can take a tank instead.

The MAV doesn't exist in the game at present and nor do SLAV's or LLV's in terms of game UI separation. Why create new classifications when they could be done under the LAV and Advanced LAV banner.

I'm not suggesting giving them everything and anything, much like a medium suit that comes in Assault and Logistics flavours doesn't suddenly get everything. They are discrete roles under the medium suit banner. Nor am I making any concrete "this is how you must fix them" statements.

They were suggestions of possibilities and rather than add anything constructive, you decided it would be better to suggest one is added to HAV's, thus further marginalising LAV's, and stating that the rest would be the roles of vehicle classifications that currently don't exist in the game that I can find, or to argue nomenclature and terminology minutiae. Scanning IS electronic warfare. It's using electronics and the EM spectrum (in this case electronic scanning) to gain an advantage on the battlefield. That's pretty much a textbook example of e-war.

The problem is, as the OP stated, that there is nothing that the LAV can currently do that the HAV cannot do better and with more staying power, which renders LAV's obsolete. This is the problem, I was just suggesting some roles that LAV's could do that HAV's currently don't.

In another vein, what the hell is with the use of all the Acronyms, not everyone understands every acronym used, MAV is fairly obvious, but what the hell is an LDS? What the hell is an LLV?

Nerf tank speed. Then LAVs become viable.

Buff tank durability somewhat to compensate.

Lol, I'll admit comparing LAV to tanks was not the best way to go, however in the current state, they do exactly the same thing.

I definitely prefer some of the other approaches being suggested in the replies, the LAV needs a role... Though as good as logistic LAV's would be, I always thought it would be better to add as a separate small turret, as flying in close with an ads would be hellishly fun (and yet equally suicidal.)

Would need to stop a pair of tanks constantly repping each other though, so perhaps a bonus for the other two that make it worth using, or just not allowing them to be fit on tanks...

Coming out and trying to compare a LAV to a HAV was where this went wrong
But I have to say, leaving them as it is is just another pointless item in game..

A Logi LAV would be great, and I'd kill the Scout LAV and make it more of an Assault vehicle (turret bonus)


LAV's should have some purpose other than free bpo's being littered like candy wrappers
Turret LAVs would add another dimension to gameplay, using them now is suicide.

Derpty Derp for CPM2 - Bring back the murder taxi !!

if you want LAVS to be.... well light attack/assault vehicules why not giving them an unique module only usable for them, that can track and shoot at targets selected by the driver, each tier of the module would have more range of target detection and accuracy

as for HAVs speed the only thing thats needed its to change the nitrous from the high slots to the low slots

In addition you went from telling me that I couldn't use IRL terms in a game (something that is demonstrably fallatious as the entire game is an abstract of various real-world concepts, most tellingly a battlefield/war scenario) because it's silly (something I provided a reasoned rebuttal to) to telling me I "Fail at understanding context" with no actual argument.

You do understand that telling me that words can have different meanings isn't an argument? It's a statement. It doesn't back up your argument in any way as I was talking to you about common conceptual frameworks for cultures, not the definitions of words. You once again come across as a petulant child who can't think of a reasoned argument and resorts to dictionary definitions and insults.

I will however warn you for the only time, I'm fed up of the insults. There is no need for them. If you want to have a reasoned discussion/argument then fine, I have no issues with that, but your entire attack is based on the assumption that I think LAV's should be given all the roles in my initial post. I don't. I was suggesting some roles they could be considered for, as I have said repeatedly. However, if you persist in the insults (asterisking out the insulting profanity doesn't change the intent) then I will report you for it. Give me reasoned argument, not crazy insults and I'll engage with you on that level.

That said, some of the ideas you've had on other posts are very interesting, I particularly like the bubble rep idea. The LAV is weak enough that I don't think it would be OP and it would make the LAV an instant target, which could bring some interesting metrics. I think they would have to be careful to make sure they couldn't get to certain areas of the map or they could create severe imbalances in the right location. But then again the reps would be probably about the same as current reppers and damage can happily penetrate through them to kill someone.

I don't think we are getting anywhere with this and we have derailed this thread enough. All we are now doing is repeating the same arguments while you resort to ad hom and insults. I don't intend to continue this discussion with you, I have better things to do with my time. Apologies for derailing the thread.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5yA92oJXM5k

LAV's can move faster than tanks can track.

Bad pilot with an armour tank refused to shoot back at the LAV... Possible lack of damage notification?

Either way, proves nothing. If you try to drive around a shield tank, it can blow you to pieces... Also how many times is that guy gonna overheat the rail, that is some bad turret control!




It is debatable... If you run a **** fit LAV, it'll blow up a lot... If you run around in free LAV with free suit, you're gonna get nowhere against mildly competent opponents.

If you build a decent Saga-II, I'd suggest it could cost more than a capable militia tank.