This is a misleading post.
The damage done by a militia 80gj railgun is 1075, about two third damage of a protoforge, and two milita mt1 missile launchers add 297 a piece to this. Fit these on a cheap sica and you can build an efficient milita tank for about 200k isk. With two gunners if you are focusing collectively on a target your militia tank is already more powerful than a proto AV, with the added bonus of doing far more DPS. This doesn't examine the relative health of a militia tank in relation to proto av.

If you are running a mil isk tank, what you are paying for is armour and shield, CPU and pg. This let's you create extremely strong tanks, with either shield or armour reppers, and turrets that deal crazy amounts of damage individually. If you don't die, you can run off and heal yourself.
What you're basically asking for is your SMALL turrets to be far more powerful than even the best AV equipment.
If you are running a tank that expensive, and crying for a forge gun nerf you're doing it wrong.

If you claims your tank is weak YOU'RE NOT SMART ENOUGH TO FIT A TANK

I wish a tank would sit still for just 30 seconds and not fire at me. Then I might be able to take one out with my FG.

Comparing cost is a waste of breath. When it comes to comparisons in Dust, you have to weigh the ability to apply damage and the ability to survive.

Compared to a FG, a fully smart fitted rail tank with full crew can lay down more damage at longer range with more accuracy than any single FGer can. Rocket tanks have it harder now, and blaster tanks will eat a FGer. This is in the supposition that, like your cost based argument, it's a one(FG) on three(fully crewed tank).

Survivability... Well fitted FGer has around 1k EHP. Well fitted tank has what... Over 10k EHP? That should be easy to figure out.

Speed... There is no way a FGer can outrun a tank unless he's driving an LAV. But if the FGer is driving, then the FGer isn't shooting.

Rail guns charge and fire faster and can be aimed with pinpoint accuracy, and have longer range, and OHK any infantry with a direct hit. FG guns don't have scope mode and, max skilled, with standard FG like the 9K330, have to wait 2.5 secs between shots, and it's extremely hard to hit infantry.

Blasters, if in range, will eat a heavy really quickly. Not in range? Tanks are much quicker than the FGer and could definitely close the range before a lone FGer could take it out.

Rockets aren't as over powered as they were, but they got nerfed too hard with too much range reduction and too much scatter. Still, I bet that tank could take down a lone FGer.

No matter how you lay it out. A fully crewed tank, fitted and driven smartly, will always eat a comparably skilled and fitted FGer in a one on one situation. So your argument is flawed. Under optimal one on one conditions, tanks eat FGs.

on the order of 6 m/sec.

The Forge Gun is fine as it is. Its already difficult enough to aim with, and It takes a lot of skill points to make it effective. Not to mention the player with the Forge Gun can easily get killed by anyone. After all its a slow charging weapon that leaves the player defenseless, but in return it comes with serious damage when used.

considering its clip size, and firing rate. no

Screw it. Buff the FG.

Why is it wrong? What I see now is that AV are extremely ineffective against tanks - it literaly takes a dumb tank driver to lose one. How can you make it more balanced?

-Decrease damage of tank? - No. We saw that happen and now ppl dont want to play with tanks anymore

-Decrease HP of a tank? - No. It would not be a tank then.

- Increase DMG on FG? - No. Let's not even go there, most ppl would say.

So, decreasing tank mobility is the only reasonalbe way. If it takes 2 dings from a FG to take out a tank, that's at least 15 consequtive seconds of FG charge cycling -- oh wait! you gotta reload it cuz it got only 4 rounds - make it 20-25sec. How far would a tank be in half a minute if it started taking dmg? That's right it would be long gone. That's why tanks are relatively risk free save inherent risks of idiot drivers, which grow out of it really fast too btw.

I've tried that argument with map size and sniper rifles. Apparently no one cares if they believe
there's some sort of injustice done to them and there personal sense of order and play style or
strategy. Sniper rifles, per description, state 2500m/s. That means almost zero travel time at 200
meters, 400 meters, 1000 meters. People apparently can't read descriptions and reason things out.
A basic militia sniper rifle says 2500m/s, The only argument I can think of is... is that number
shown in the descriptions operational distance, planning distance, optimal distance, max
distance? And it still really doesn't matter at this point as the map size is small enough to make
travel time irrelevant at those speeds.
Sorry, had to get it out of my system.