Better yet, buff Small Turrets. Doing so will both fix the underwhelming firepower of the LAV and Dropship as well as make HAVs want to work with others.

No. -1
I do not want to give the job of keeping me alive to random blue dots.

See, here's how I see it.

Sometimes I can't dedicate two or three hours to gaming. In fact, most times I can't do that. This means I can't go into corp chat and find a group of dedicated squaddies to run with. I have twenty minutes, I'm going to play two ambush matches, and then I'm going to get back to work.

For one of you dropsuit guys, this wouldn't be an issue. You can just run around un-mic'd and spam grenades, or bullets, or reps, or whatever your thing is. And you're gonna do just fine. I can usually hit top 3 on my team in a militia logi suit this way.

For vehicle drivers, however, it's just flat out not possible. Especially under systems such as those outlined in the OP. It becomes such that if I want to be a vehicle operator I don't just benefit from being on comms. I have to be on comms with corpmates I'm accustomed to working with, or else I'm going to die. And that just isn't good balance.

Should HAVs be something that works best when used with friendlies? Like everything else in the game, yes. Should they, and all other vehicles, be completely inaccessible to casual players? Hell damn no.

Sure, I guess, in much the same way a mugger "incentivizes" you to give them your wallet. "Do it or you'll die" is technically an incentive. Just...not really in keeping with the way people normally use the term.

How about this. We do a 1v3 battle. You get a solo tank, I get two gunners. They will not use AV or anything like it on your HAV to keep it lol fair.

1) Forcing people to play how you want them to play.

2) Actually making the HAV a four to five person vehicle.

I do not want HAVs to go the way of LAVs and dropships, and that's exactly what adding more people is going to do

No it doesn't have to stop, Kitten. Maybe it can stop when you personally Nerf the Thale Sniper Rifle to be a wiffle bat.

The entire game is built upon better gear and acquisition thereof, specifically Proto and Officer Gear. Skill up and get (and be able to use) the reward. While playing the way you want to play. Not while everyone Else has to play the way You Want them to play

If the mythical blaster tank you refer to can be one-shot killed it has less than 2500 Shields and Armor combined. That is about the maximum that can be dealt with the ~1900 HP Rail and the bonuses necessary to even equip it. That gun requires .3 seconds to spool and 2.2 seconds to fire a second round. When the first one hits the Blaster had better be moving and enabling modules.

By the was, did you add the numbers up regarding the Proto Swarm Launcher? You will find it does more damage than the rail gun in question and can go around corners. Let's make each missile require a crew member.

Blaster Tanks have to keep away from the Sniper Tank's LOS. Or it will die.
For that matter most things require not getting into LOS when a Sniper is around, either Merc or Tank.

Finally, unbalanced gear is a fact. If you drop a tank on the battle field you need to be prepared to lose it. If you drop a Soma and a Sagaris arrives, well you had better be a good driver because the odds on you surviving just went down.

Either they would have to nerf HAV HP, thus effectively requiring a full squad to not get one-shot, or leave HAV HP where it is and allow high-end HAVs to have ridiculous amounts of eHP. So there's your options, either you're making a full squad an effective requirement, or you're making a full squad ridiculously powerful.

Forgetting one major thing : Turret Installation being totally useless. You can see HAV roll them out each game without even worrying.

1) turrets should be blue or red when game starts.
2) they should have way more HP so that a HAV going 1vs1 against one would be a risk for him. And to avoid militia forge gun taking them down in 4 shots.....
3) The type of turrets are sometimes odd compared to their positionning. Why would anyone add a blaster turret facing an open area where a railgun or a FG could kill them peacefully from distance. Blaster turrets are close range.

Buffing turret installations would force HAVs to rely oon infantry to move on specific areas. They wouldnt be destroyed that often and actually be a tactical asset teams could fight for. Instead of WP ressource for the tankers.

No bad idea from someone who doesnt drive anything

1. Should be hacked not auto hacked, they already can track fast moving LAVs anything else will get hit including infantry and vehicles making them a pain in the arse and losing clones but not due to the other side kicking your arse to a cheap mechanic
2. No way they already have 4k hp as it is and its enough, a turret can take a vehicle apart but thats if the pilot hasnt noticed the turret so they get punished for it
3. Only point i agree with

No because you have to realize how many tankers you are upsetting right now. I suggest you let this idea die because what do you run what if I suggested a complete over haul to it you would be mad obviously. You don't realize this is what you are doing to tankers. Best bet is you open up a new tank called the squad tank based for squad design and not solo operations when others use it in a group as you said it becomes much stronger. This is not rude but the truth leave my tanks alone.

No.

we already know why tank fights last so short and no HP and resistance shouldnt be based on the number of bluedots or teammates i got in it because it doesnt make sense that when 1 person jumps out to cap the objective my tank magically becomes weaker

Can't speak for the other guy, but I don't like two. HAVs are supposed to have one purpose: balls out fighting. If HAVs can deploy a drone to hack installations, or have any similar such capabilities, then there's essentially no reason to ever not use them. I like vehicles as much as the next guy. Probably more so. But infantry need to have a role on the field.

I'm not really sure how I feel about number three. I almost think HAVs should only have the one turret. The small turrets are really bad at their anti-infantry role, and they would be fairly game-breaking if they weren't. Infantry are supposed to be the HAV's weakness, the fly that they can't move quickly enough to swat. I rather wish they'd just gone with high/mid/low slots, personally, and would nix the whole "turret slot" thing.

As for four...*shrug*. There are a lot of things that need fixing about HAVs and turrets.

HAVs are super squad oriented. Their performance increases drastically if they run with squad support. I would argue that they are far more team dependent than dropsuits. It's just that that support is almost always better from outside of the HAV. And I don't have a problem with that.

People don't talk about the small turret gunners because they're irrelevant. Ask yourself instead how often people say "I couldn't get within AV grenade range of that HAV, his infantry support is too good!" That is how they're squad oriented.

Now I don't necessarily agree with this method of balance. I don't really like that HAV survival is about running away as soon as you take damage so you can spend 90 seconds repping yourself. That's not a fun way to play. That's why I wrote the post about governing vehicle mod use by capacitor, which I feel will be a lot better.

LOL I don't think anyone is taking bulletsnit as anything more than a disgruntled n00b. We all know he is 100% wrong, and he clearly does not want to put his money where is fingers are xD


My offer is still available. You ready to do this? I'm definitely looking forward to proving you wrong because you don't like to listen to other more knowledgeable HAV drivers on forums. Even though your intentions are probably good, you're really just hurting one way groupsof people like to play the game.

This is not a troll post or anything like that. I am serious. Your idea will destroy HAVs, and I can show you why.

I like HAVs, and I feel like they have been gimped enough. They are fun to drive, and still effective if you use it as a team operated vehicle. You can do anything solo, but it does not make whatever you are doing good.

To be honest, I and many other HAV drivers are skeptical about driving HAVs in the next build. Suggestions like this and many others will completely ruin them. There are many players attempting to make HAVs unusable. Some intentionally, and some not, but I and a few other HAV drivers are worried that CCP will listen to them, and essentially remove them from the game by making them useless.

Some are pretty obvious about their hate for HAVs. For instance, duster's blog is run by ROFL alliance, and that alliance just lost almost all of their HAV operators. I think they now have one or two at most. So what do they do? They go to their blog and make a post asking CCP to make HAVs unplayable. It's nothing new for them - I remember when we were in the alliance, they liked to try to put restrictions for skirmishes. The restrictions were always on something that they did not have. No lasers or mass drivers available? Try to make a rule that lasers and mass drivers cannot be used in corp battles. Only four proto suit players on? Try to make a rule that only four proto suits are allowed in corp battles.

So yah, we'll see what CCP does to HAVs and other things like them. I am hopeful that CCP won't kill them, but who knows.

You're asking them to require multiple squads to operate one.

Maybe that is where we disagree. I'd rather not have DUST514 to become Battlefield 4.

It might be more powerful if it can soak up ten forge shots, two orbitals and repair all of that damage every thirty seconds, but I have a feeling that you would not consider that "balanced".

If you're making a HAV driver a 6 or 7 man crew, it better be worth it. If you're not using at least a three man team, you're just doing it wrong.

I am being constructive. Now stop dodging.


If you win I'll completely agree with you, but there is no way that HAVs are a one man vehicle. There are plenty of people who are just trying to nerf HAVs, show me that I am wrong.

This is the last time I'll post this. I am 99% sure you're just trying to troll HAV drivers because you dislike HAVs and would like to see them nerfed.

I don't understand why you would refuse this offer if you believe that you are right. I am offering to pay for your HAVs and extra if you prove me wrong. I'll even agree with you and concede that I was completely wrong and mistaken. You don't have to post anything. If it is 50/50, there's a good chance that we'll both lose at least 8 to 9 tanks.

That's a lot of ISK I could lose, and you can earn a significant amount. I'm comfortable putting up that much money because I am not only confident that what I am saying is accurate, but I am also willing to back it up with ISK.

you are messing with what we have already

How would this tank idea play in the game when the MCC follows its name. Mobile ....Command...Center.

This gives me an idea.

Drivers/pilots should be re-designated as "vehicle commanders".

Anyone in any seat in the vehicle should be able to bring up the module wheel with R2, not just the commander. The vehicle commander will have the ability to select modules and assign them to another player in the vehicle. This way, if you're running with a squad and you trust your gunners to look after you, they can be handed control of things, but if you're running solo and a random jumps into your tank, they won't hijack important things which you really shouldn't trust a blueberry with.

Also, while I like the idea of a "command centre" vehicle, I think they should have "command" variants for certain vehicle types, rather than making it a "this is what tanks do" role.