I'm assuming that heavy and their logi's don't count? Just saying...

Said it once, i'll say it again, I want fairness for both side's, and fact is, most people are too dumb to run vehicle's and some are too dumb to use anti vehicles, my entire opinion is never going to actually be on the vehicles, it'll be on the player that uses them, a player define's vehicles, not the suit's (double standards I know). Most of the time when vehicles go +10/0 it's because of skill, or the fact his enemies are too dumb and scrubbish to actually take him out, i've used swarm's and literally many if not all the time vehicles have either come out on top, or ran out of my line of sight, being smart, being skilled (same case can be made for infantry, some people simply don't know how to take them out) , that's why i'm against swarm nerfing, unless you make them dumbfire and give them the PLC treatment, it'll never be fixed, and if vehicles tankers be smart, and skilled, there won't ever be a need for a nerf to swarm's, because swarm's will always be out played (until you hit a wall that is).

It's ironic Zan that you have based your entire opinion of vehicle pilots on the worlds an actions of one player than even most other vehicle pilots loath to include in vehicle discussion, not because his experience or ideals are wrong but because his attitude is incredibly poor and not wholly constructive.

I think we can all agree that team would could and should be a part of HAV and vehicle combat but not at the cost of core functionality of the vehicle. As Dust Fiend has said dividing the gunnery and pilot roles for vehicles like the Assault Dropship and HAV relegates them from being an enjoyable career choices to as Dust Fiend states 'glorified chauffeurs'.

We can argue about what the core reasons vehicles become unbalanced are on a build by build basis and would eventually reach the same bloody stale mate we always reach with neither side giving ground and submitting to nerfs. In this case however while I like Mobius' suggestion I do not believe it is the optimal path to vehicle balance only the optimal path to creating a game in which more infantry function on the field and vehicles are the irregular choice no one wants to commit riflemen to operating, in much the same way it is on most maps.

I'm also astounded by the double standard that many infantrymen lay at the feet of vehicle pilots insinuating that a pilot scoring say 10/0 or 12/1 or the like is somehow vastly different or less fair than another infantryman finishing the game with 15/2 or 22/0. You can scream 1 for 1 at me all day but when an AVer is good enough at their job to kill me then they will kill me and not sooner.

My 1000 Officers Forge Guns are laughing at you all

So, if the tank's become more readily available (wouldn't complain, more tanks = more wp's for anyone popping them), then it would be better balanced? Okay i'll admit that I skimmed some of what was said, so i'm only taking scarce notes, i'll re-read them properly later, but if the vehicles costed very little say, 40k for a GV.0? and maybe +2k for each mods used, it could be better balanced and less stressful? (this is the jist im getting here, cause we're seriously getting absolutely no where here, the more people go back and forth in this thread, the more things stay the same, eventually this will have all become absolutely moot, so we need to come up with a compromise that both sides can be happy/okay with).

So, what about the missile turret? Should that gun's splash damage be removed as well? I'd rather not have a carbon copy of the HAV missile turret, it's explosive radius is uncharacteristically weak.

As for the rest of it, I like it, AV grenade style SL, sound's doable, but the amount of damage should make up for its dumbfire mechanic, the fact that is wouldn't have splash damage also needs to be taken into account, and the fact that it's skill is tied to lock-on, it'll need a skill to compensate for whatever it may lack, possibly missile velocity.

10% missile speed per level?