Nope, not exaggerating, and certainly not any more exaggerated than "wha wha tanks are unstoppable". Try it yourself. Tanks can't run anymore, and the railgun is useless against anything other than a stationary vehicle or a turret installation. Tried to kill a forge gunner who was standing still, put the **** right at his feet but it didnt so squat.

If you could get it at his feet while he was stationary, why didn't you just put it right through his chest? That's what I always used to do. Don't rely on the splash damage..

If you could get it at his feet while he was stationary, why didn't you just put it right through his chest? That's what I always used to do. Don't rely on the splash damage.

Also, the slowness of the turret wouldn't even matter if HAVs had separate driver and gunner positions. I don't understand why HAV users are so opposed to this when it would increase the effectiveness of their vehicles while simultaneously countering the whining of all the infantry players about how they're one-man force-multipliers. And yes, I used HAVs almost exclusively in the E3 build because I wanted to try something new, having spent the previous build in Dropships. So I'm not one of the whiners trying to find further ways to nerf something that's been nerfed enough already.
As someone who used to use HAVs, I would actually love to just drive the thing, and have another member of my squad run the gun. That's what headsets are for.

Didummmms poor tanky wanky lose his god mode, awww shame.

I agree, I use a railgun on the tank and when they buffed the **** out of the splash damage this build I though "uhhhhhwut?" it turned the railgun into an infantry eating machine which doesn't seem right. Its so stupidly easy to get kills with the 400+ splash damage on the railgun I felt bad using it. in the E3 build you really had to get a direct hit with it, and that felt very reasonable to me. It required more skill and forced people who wanted to be able to kill other HAVs to need support gunners to deal with infantry.

Again, HAVs in E3 build was FAR better and I think we need to move towards where it was at that point.

I'd like for the tanks to be even more powerful than they were but far more difficult to use and something that takes several months to train into. They should be like a battleship. Crazy strong but suseptable to a well trained group of frigates (Infantry).

Right now it takes very little SP to train into compaired to how much SP you can get back in a very short period of time.

If you could get it at his feet while he was stationary, why didn't you just put it right through his chest? That's what I always used to do. Don't rely on the splash damage.

Also, the slowness of the turret wouldn't even matter if HAVs had separate driver and gunner positions. I don't understand why HAV users are so opposed to this when it would increase the effectiveness of their vehicles while simultaneously countering the whining of all the infantry players about how they're one-man force-multipliers. And yes, I used HAVs almost exclusively in the E3 build because I wanted to try something new, having spent the previous build in Dropships. So I'm not one of the whiners trying to find further ways to nerf something that's been nerfed enough already.
As someone who used to use HAVs, I would actually love to just drive the thing, and have another member of my squad run the gun. That's what headsets are for.

Admittedly, the HAVs in the E3 build were a bit overpowered against infantry, but part of that was due to an inability to coordinate since you never even knew who you'd be playing with. Also, the AV grenades were a joke, and the REs were far more effective against infantry than vehicles.

See, what you're really seeing here is that they seem overpowered in comparison to the performance of the tools used to kill them. I don't think we'll see an end to this debate until they have a hard counter. A vehicle one, not an infantry weapon. If anything, I would support a return to the full capability of AV weapons at the beginning of this build, the Forge Gun being returned to its old range, and the implementation of a Gunship vehicle, as that's what such helicopters are used for in real life. With those in place, you could return HAVs to their E3 build effectiveness (though I still support separate driver and gunner positions) and they would no longer feel like unstoppable juggernauts while still remaining effective assets. Heck, since they're HAVs and not just tanks, allow them to carry guided SAM launchers and flak cannons as turret options to provide a hard counter against heavier air targets.

To test the splash damage?

Aint that the truth

Oh by no means do I think the E3 build was perfect in terms of vehicles and AV, but you have to agree things felt more balanced than they are now. With the addition of pilot suits and passive skill bonuses, I think a nerf to vehicles was in order since those additions would ultimately buff them back up.

Even so my point being that HAVs need to be strong since they are after all tanks, however with some teamwork a team with moderate AV should be able to make that HAV run for its life. A well coordinated group with good AV weapons should be able to outright kill it. I think we were far closer to that dynamic in the last build than we are now.

Oh by no means do I think the E3 build was perfect in terms of vehicles and AV, but you have to agree things felt more balanced than they are now. With the addition of pilot suits and passive skill bonuses, I think a nerf to vehicles was in order since those additions would ultimately buff them back up.

Even so my point being that HAVs need to be strong since they are after all tanks, however with some teamwork a team with moderate AV should be able to make that HAV run for its life. A well coordinated group with good AV weapons should be able to outright kill it. I think we were far closer to that dynamic in the last build than we are now.

No, to allow separated driver and gunner positions to coordinate.

Me and 2 other guys easily dropped a specced out Sagaris in under 5 seconds because we took the time to coordinate and spent SP and ISK in decent AV gear (but not proto). This is how it should be.

Exactly. It should require teamwork to take down an HAV. The only issue is that it should require an equal or greater level of teamwork to operate one.

i lol'd @OP
youmadbro? king of battlefield no more? seems youre the one whining. adapt or die. welcome to Eve. oh look! Darwin Torpedo

Mobius Wyvern:
"Yes, if you get a group of people working together to kill one of those things, it should go down. But that's what it should require, not a single guy with a proto swarm blowing them up on his lonesome and saying everything is balanced."

Thats what I'm saying. This morning I lost a well fitted, well tanked gunnlogi to one militia swarm. Can't get close enough to him to use blasters effectively, so running is the only option, which doesnt work on more open maps where your only cover from terrain is the rock spires.

I think that maps sucks for anyone who isn't a sniper haha. Though have they fixed pathing for swarms? because I swear to god whenever I try to use them on that map the rockets say "Hell with the lock!" and target the nearest spire.

I'd like for the tanks to be even more powerful than they were but far more difficult to use and something that takes several months to train into. They should be like a battleship. Crazy strong but suseptable to a well trained group of frigates (Infantry).

Right now it takes very little SP to train into compaired to how much SP you can get back in a very short period of time.

Paran, you lost a well fitted gunloggi to 1 militia swarm ??? you what ??? HUH ??? eh ???
Shut up. lol.

go back to CoD please.

The whole HAV vs. AV needed to be looked into...

Judging from what people are saying, I think this is only a quickfix whilst we are on the current build in order to make the game a little more playable. I'm sure things will change when the new build is rolled out.