I feel like we have heard a lot from the dedicated HAV drivers in regards to what we know about the future of tanks in Uprising. We have also heard a lot from the "Tank-Haters" that don't specialize in AV and want to see tanks nerfed and/or made less of a threat to them. But, I think, AV vs HAV balance should be determined by the people that specialize in each, respectively. So i am curious to see more of the thoughts from dedicated AV guys on the current and possible future state of HAV vs AV.

Here are my thoughts:

<----- DEDICATED AV

AV Skills:
Weaponry 5
Forge Gun Operation 5
Forge Gun Proficiency 5
Heavy Weapon Sharpshooter 5
Heavy Weapon Sharpshooter Proficiency 5
Heavy Weapon Rapid Reload 5
Heavy Weapon Rapid Reload Proficiency 5
Heavy Weapon Ammo 5
Heavy Weapon Upgrades 3
Dropsuit Operation 5 (for the lower profile)

And always run 2-3 damage mods. Basically, I am designed to kill vehicles.

Here is the kicker: I 100% AGREE WITH WHAT MANY OF THE TANKERS ARE SAYING.

They are currently far too easy to solo and/or harass into worthlessness in a battle. Hunting tanks is my favorite thing to do and would HATE to see them nerfed into being rail snipers from the redlines. As, selfishly, this decreases my fun in hunting them.

With my skills, I should be able to solo a tank, but only with the right combination of skill and luck. But both skill and luck should factor in if I, one AV guy, am able to solo a tank. It shouldn't happen often (it does now, have yet to find a tank I couldn't solo if it leaves the redzone and I dedicate myself to destroying it). I should only solo a skilled tanker when they get overzealous or make a mistake, otherwise it should take at least one more AV besides myself in a coordinated effort to finish the job. Why should they "need support" if I don't? This is the go-to argument for the masses supporting tank nerfs, is it not?

I do fear that "glass cannon" is the future of Dust and will effectively eliminate both the HAV and AV specializations as "fun, specialized, and viable" gameplay options.

I will wait to see what Uprising brings to pass judgement on the AV/Vehicle debate. But I can see why dedicated tankers are worried, everything we know so far supports their worries. And I am worried too, as the downfall of the tanks would also be the downfall of AV.

Of course, I am only speaking about people specialized in HAVs, everything militia should always be vulnerable to everyone on the battlefield because you have not taken the time or effort to dedicate yourself to it and shouldn't reap the rewards of someone who did.

The issue is really Light AV being too potent. Even a Scout can do it.

The role of Light AV should be to deter vehicles, not outright destroy them (unless used en-masse).

I focused heavily into being an AV heavy. I greatly enjoy hunting down armor and making it go pop. Unprepared or poorly fit tanks go up in a fireball very quickly.

Better driven, and better fit tanks require real effort, but even the toughest tank can be dropped in short order by two AV guys. No amount of hardeners can protect from the amount of damage that two proto forges can put out in 8 seconds.

Tanks need some love.

However, and this might be a big deal, it might not, but it looks like forge guns are getting softer. No sharpshooter, no damage skill, and the proto suit can only run a single, not a triple damage mod setup.

So even though it looks rough for tankers, and it probably is to a certain degree, we should be waiting to see how the balance pass has worked for the forge guns before crying too much.

If CCP had done as promised an released the item list maybe we would find out that AV nades have been nerfed to hell and back.

One can hope. I just want tanks that are worth killing. I like being forced to bring out a fit with a proto forge and proto AV nades because the guy is just that hard to kill.

Ah yes, AV nades, this is another thing to address - the seek range is ridiculous, even on the ones that are supposed to have less seek range (is that the packed ones?). Drastically reduce the seek range, so you can't just lob an AV nade in the general direction and watch as it flies 90 degrees round to pull into the vehicle. Tone it down so that the AV nade has to pretty much exactly hit the vehicle and then it sticks. Hell, make them sticky grenades even!

However they do need to actually stick. Otherwise they'd bounce off and do no damage whatsoever and become completely pointless.

As a disclaimer: I don't want to see tanks nerfed, they are as balanced as I've ever seen them.
However the complainers about AV still need to HTFU.

I wouldn't say I'm dedicated AV, but at swarm proficiency 2, and maxed REs, I'd say I'm qualified to comment:
You say you can solo even the best tank, I can too. But I doubt what you mean by "solo" really means solo. Any tank, on any ambush map has retreat options, and the high hp tanks can resist proto AV long enough to perform that retreat. To follow them, you will very likely have to expose yourself to enemy infantry, and I think it is that infantry response that really determines wether you can solo a tank or not.

Everbody, no matter how skilled, has encountered those matches where they just aren't going to be able to make the difference. It is those matches, where tankers are overconfident in their abilities, that they complain about everybody pulling out militia AV, or being chased around the map by someone in proto gear. When AV is on the receiving end of those stomps, even a squad of skilled & dedicated proto AV isn't going to cost anyone their tank. It becomes simply unrealistic to hold the , minimum, two, complimentary positions required to take down a half-intelligent tanker.

Here is the kicker: I 100% AGREE WITH WHAT MANY OF THE TANKERS ARE SAYING.

They are currently far too easy to solo and/or harass into worthlessness in a battle. Hunting tanks is my favorite thing to do and would HATE to see them nerfed into being rail snipers from the redlines.

AV Skills:
Weaponry 5
Forge Gun Operation 5
Forge Gun Proficiency 5
Heavy Weapon Sharpshooter 5
Heavy Weapon Sharpshooter Proficiency 5
Heavy Weapon Rapid Reload 5
Heavy Weapon Rapid Reload Proficiency 5
Heavy Weapon Ammo 5
Heavy Weapon Upgrades 3
Dropsuit Operation 5 (for the lower profile)

And always run 2-3 damage mods. Basically, I am designed to kill vehicles.

As a disclaimer: I don't want to see tanks nerfed, they are as balanced as I've ever seen them.
However the complainers about AV still need to HTFU.

I wouldn't say I'm dedicated AV, but at swarm proficiency 2, and maxed REs, I'd say I'm qualified to comment:
You say you can solo even the best tank, I can too. But I doubt what you mean by "solo" really means solo. Any tank, on any ambush map has retreat options, and the high hp tanks can resist proto AV long enough to perform that retreat. To follow them, you will very likely have to expose yourself to enemy infantry, and I think it is that infantry response that really determines wether you can solo a tank or not.

Everbody, no matter how skilled, has encountered those matches where they just aren't going to be able to make the difference. It is those matches, where tankers are overconfident in their abilities, that they complain about everybody pulling out militia AV, or being chased around the map by someone in proto gear. When AV is on the receiving end of those stomps, even a squad of skilled & dedicated proto AV isn't going to cost anyone their tank. It becomes simply unrealistic to hold the , minimum, two, complimentary positions required to take down a half-intelligent tanker.

Again:

http://youtu.be/6qHL7jET8Gc

This is footage of a FGM-148 Javelin (1990s) completely obliterating a T-72 tank (1970s). This is essentially Advanced versus Standard in terms of generations. Why? The Javelin was the second generation of AV designed to kill T-72s, the first being the M47 Dragon.

Rules of believable AV:

Under optimal circumstances, a single AV user should be able to one-shot a tank of one meta lower.

Under optimal circumstances, a single AV user should be able to kill a tank of the same meta level without a nanohive.

When well implemented, Modules, Cover, and Infantry Screens negate the "optimal circumstances" for AV.

That said...

The current implementation of AV sucks. I'd be happy to see it revamped, provided the rules above hold.

You do realize if you hit a t72 anywhere but the turret it wont explode? The 45o slope on the hull makes LAW and TOW rounds to explode prematurely.
The javilin also uses a shaped copper charge to blast through the armour in the hopes of setting of the ammo or killing the crew.
Also most teat like that the target vehicle is loaded with a few hundred rounds to simulate live rounds.

Well, I know Swarms have been nerfed slightly.

He's right, though, it's super realistic and applicable to this situation. I mean, the T-72 probably has pretty much the same type of shield generators as our HAVs, and the plating is probably made from the same super dense rare-earth minerals.

Again:

http://youtu.be/6qHL7jET8Gc

This is footage of a FGM-148 Javelin (1990s) completely obliterating a T-72 tank (1970s). This is essentially Advanced versus Standard in terms of generations. Why? The Javelin was the second generation of AV designed to kill T-72s, the first being the M47 Dragon.

Rules of believable AV:

Under optimal circumstances, a single AV user should be able to one-shot a tank of one meta lower.

Under optimal circumstances, a single AV user should be able to kill a tank of the same meta level without a nanohive.

When well implemented, Modules, Cover, and Infantry Screens negate the "optimal circumstances" for AV.

That said...

The current implementation of AV sucks. I'd be happy to see it revamped, provided the rules above hold.

First of all, the LAW and TOW are "Militia" in this system as they were designed for previous generations of tanks, not the T-72. Those should not one-shot a T-72.

Shaped charges with penetrators are pretty common for that generation of AV missiles. It does not negate the argument, as those are second generation after the T-72. The technology will change over time, but it will be designed to exploit whatever the perceived weaknesses of a given generation of tank might be.

Of course a target vehicle would carry live rounds or a substitute if you are doing an "optimal circumstances" field test.

It is also worth noting that tanks can, and do, catch fire. Not the ammo, not the fuel- the tank itself. The temperatures generated by shaped charges can ignite metals like aluminum (or even steel). This is magnified in aircraft where Aluminum and Magnesium are used extensively to save weight. Similar tradeoffs would likely have been made in New Eden:

"This tritanium alloy we used to increase speed could ignite if struck by a missile."
"Yeah, but we have shields for that."

First of all, the LAW and TOW are "Militia" in this system as they were designed for previous generations of tanks, not the T-72. Those should not one-shot a T-72.

Shaped charges with penetrators are pretty common for that generation of AV missiles. It does not negate the argument, as those are second generation after the T-72. The technology will change over time, but it will be designed to exploit whatever the perceived weaknesses of a given generation of tank might be.

Of course a target vehicle would carry live rounds or a substitute if you are doing an "optimal circumstances" field test.

It is also worth noting that tanks can, and do, catch fire. Not the ammo, not the fuel- the tank itself. The temperatures generated by shaped charges can ignite metals like aluminum (or even steel). This is magnified in aircraft where Aluminum and Magnesium are used extensively to save weight. Similar tradeoffs would likely have been made in New Eden:

"This tritanium alloy we used to increase speed could ignite if struck by a missile."
"Yeah, but we have shields for that."

Sake Monster, you pronounce Sake wrong and it makes me sad cause I often drink sake at traditional Nihonshu places where they only serve stuff you need to special order.

But a big +1 for the thread.

Again:

http://youtu.be/6qHL7jET8Gc

This is footage of a FGM-148 Javelin (1990s) completely obliterating a T-72 tank (1970s). This is essentially Advanced versus Standard in terms of generations. Why? The Javelin was the second generation of AV designed to kill T-72s, the first being the M47 Dragon.

Rules of believable AV:

Under optimal circumstances, a single AV user should be able to one-shot a tank of one meta lower.

Under optimal circumstances, a single AV user should be able to kill a tank of the same meta level without a nanohive.

When well implemented, Modules, Cover, and Infantry Screens negate the "optimal circumstances" for AV.

That said...

The current implementation of AV sucks. I'd be happy to see it revamped, provided the rules above hold.

My Observations:

Swarm Missiles fly in strange directions instead of just being fast and powerful. They should follow a believable ballistic with an understandable turn radius and should pack a serious wallop at the end. They should also miss vehicles that can get behind cover or dodge (not outrun- dodge) and they should be vulnerable to things like chaff and point-defense systems.

Forge Guns have no ADS- so even though they are capable of great accuracy, the sights often obscure targets smaller than an entire HAV. Partially exposed turrets, etc. can be very hard to pick out of the terrain.

Proximity Mines appear to have no IFF, so friendly tanks will blow them up.

AV Grenades have a reasonable punch, but it can feel like easy mode when the tanker wants to play Lone Gunman or gets too far away from his infantry screen. Seriously guys... Get backup gunners and an infantry screen.

Plasma Cannon - no clue. I'm guessing it will have similar issues, but who knows?

But your heavily specialised into AV using a forge gun, so you should be able to at least solo standard tanks. But all people have to do is equip packed AV grenades and their set to go.

Again:

http://youtu.be/6qHL7jET8Gc

This is footage of a FGM-148 Javelin (1990s) completely obliterating a T-72 tank (1970s). This is essentially Advanced versus Standard in terms of generations. Why? The Javelin was the second generation of AV designed to kill T-72s, the first being the M47 Dragon.

Rules of believable AV:

Under optimal circumstances, a single AV user should be able to one-shot a tank of one meta lower.

Under optimal circumstances, a single AV user should be able to kill a tank of the same meta level without a nanohive.

When well implemented, Modules, Cover, and Infantry Screens negate the "optimal circumstances" for AV.

That said...

The current implementation of AV sucks. I'd be happy to see it revamped, provided the rules above hold.

My Observations:

Swarm Missiles fly in strange directions instead of just being fast and powerful. They should follow a believable ballistic with an understandable turn radius and should pack a serious wallop at the end. They should also miss vehicles that can get behind cover or dodge (not outrun- dodge) and they should be vulnerable to things like chaff and point-defense systems.

Forge Guns have no ADS- so even though they are capable of great accuracy, the sights often obscure targets smaller than an entire HAV. Partially exposed turrets, etc. can be very hard to pick out of the terrain.

Proximity Mines appear to have no IFF, so friendly tanks will blow them up.

AV Grenades have a reasonable punch, but it can feel like easy mode when the tanker wants to play Lone Gunman or gets too far away from his infantry screen. Seriously guys... Get backup gunners and an infantry screen.

Plasma Cannon - no clue. I'm guessing it will have similar issues, but who knows?

So yeah tanks should be a team effort to take down not just solo able.

i know the feeling, being a proto AV user for 11 months; i find it satisfying when i can solo a tank in the right conditions, as that is my role. Yet i do agree it is sad to see Mady's being taken out by 3-4 packed av nades. I understand why they can do it (as its the counter to free LAVs); but it can be a bit to much at times, as it only takes 70k SP & 4k ISK, to take out a 1M ISK tank.

I think as AV & for tankers, need to "realize" that being solo'd by LEGIT av isn't a problem, as in those moments is usually b/c 1 of 2 things occurs:

1). AV'er has a upper hand/position

2). Tanker, YOU overextended and made an error

It's the use a basic AV (be nades, SL, FG) that can solo a higher tier tank that causes the problem. Not sure how to adjust fully; as we dont want to go back to earlier builds were it required 2-3 proto AV guys to take out a tank, as that was to much. CCP does have a challange

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=icEeEaz-Q8A

For you Oh no javelin stopped and tank lives. How does this work. Their is a such think as defenses. And we actually have even better then this out there.

So long as tanks require a team to operate.

I agree with this, tanks should basically require a full crew to be properly run, though so should AV.

Now if only we could get tankers who didn't cower behind the redline for the entire match sniping. It is usually that or the second they take a hint of damage they flee top speed to the redline, it is ridiculous really. You'd think with all that firepower and defenses, they'd have some balls.

590,000 isk... I think we have a right to flee.

Infantry scrub, stop telling us we have no right to hide, I will hide on the red line because it is safer and economically beneficial to me than running out and letting you kill me. Infantry is boring, also how will you be a good infantry player if you wish to eventually go in to Vehicles? When all the core skills are now separated and such, it's not about playing with what we can't afford, you're lucky, Infantry can do well in free fits.. we on the other hand don't get such a luxury.

Edit: and your little bit about "with all that firepower and defences, you'd think we'd have some balls?"
Heres the thing, we don't have any "defences", so take what you think you know about vehicles and shove it up your ass, it's not as easy as it seems, and all those shields and armor mean **** when AV is hitting you at 1/4 of your hp per shot.

I run both proto heavy and standerd tanks and I used to love the chalange of hunting out enimy tanks but now its far far far too easy to solo most tanks , there are still a few other tankers that give me a run for my isk but sadly most otger tankers either die inone or two shots from my rail gun or 2 to 3 shots from my proto tank eating forge gun setup . Jason had a thread that I fully supported calling for a massive hp buff in exchange for a large reductuon in dammage but sadly ccp has gone in the compleate opposite ditecrion . This will as stated by many other tankers will do nothing but force us into nothing but redline sniper tanking . Lets just hope ccp pulls there act together and sorts out the havs so we can acctually be tanks and not just free wp for someone with a proto forge set up.

Cry Moar?

I think I hear CCP aborting your HAVs.

lol.

My problem is that while I do see the tankers point of view and do feel that CCP is headed in the wrong direction with this glass cannon crap , the fact is that AV also has it's problems and no one seems to acknowledge it. Namely the fact that AV doesn't get compensated unless they get the kill shot.

Dedicated AV fits are NOT cheap !


I'm fine with militia AV being nerfed. I'm fine with kill stealing AV nades being dialed back some. But when you start talking about making Tanks tougher against Adv/Proto AV I start talking about making a living . Okay you make it so AV troops get even get less kills. Fine ... but AV doesn't get much WP's atm . My Gun alone costs half my game earnings . A couple of deaths which is VERY likely to happen to a AVer can put me deep in the red. Yet I can do most of the damage to a tank yet get nothing because some nader gets the kill shot and some AR guy steals the assist by shooting the tank (I'm helping !!) between my shots ?

Is it fair to have it take 3 AV guys to take out a tank yet only one of them gets payed in full for it ?

I suppose I could torque off my teammates by blowing up all installations they are usually hacking and using for cover . But should I really be competing against my own team ?


Basically what I'm saying is that I'm not running a charity here how am I supposed to afford this mess?

Outstanding *applauds*
This is why this game is going to ****, you have these AR scrubs thinking vehicles and other classes are easy mode and when called out they respond about said person "crying".

Settle down AR scrub.

Shame there isn't a prototype HAV.

If we're going by meta level; the Marauders are Advanced HAVs.

lol, you called me an AR scrub? lol, I rarely if ever use an AR. You're so pissed you're "Ad Homing" and failing cause you don't know **** about me. I, however, am willing to bet that I have you pegged dead to rights since you're so very very butthurt over my post.

HTFU.

Allow me to Reiterate: H. T. F. U.

Allow me to reiterate something else too: "Don't fly what you can't afford to lose" --CCP

You're right, I'm sorry, am so very angry right now and now the tears are rolling freely down my cheeks :'(

Just to make sure you know, I'm going to be sitting at the back of my red line, so mugs like you can come to the forums and complain that it's not fair you can't reach me yet I can one shot you. ^_^ Guess you're right, defences are great when AV can't hit me.

Thank you for admitting that you're a coward in a game even when you're sitting in an armored death machine.

Lol, HAV scrub hiding behind the redline, lol.

I think I made that painfully obvious when I made a thread about a HAV truce, where all HAVs in said truce are likely to be redline snipers and wouldn't snipe one another on the other teams, I'll bump if for you :)

My "Death Machine" had 6000 shields, since the Sagaris has gone, I've got about 5000 shields. A proto forge will deal 2000HP easily to my "death machine", three shotting it.

Several AV grenades that deal about 1500 damage needs two people on a Nanohive and in seconds I'm done.

I'd like to see you, oh mighty player, take a "death machine" out come uprising and not get instafucked :)

You wouldn't have to deal with the proto forge or the AV grenades if you had a proper AR scrub crew with you in your HAV.

You flatter me, though I am far from a mighty player, I just know how to not put all of my eggs in one basket and then send the basket down a river of my tears when one egg breaks.

Doesn't matter if you have a fully crewed tank, or a full squad sweeping ahead, you will get smashed by proto AV, tried it multiple times, works for a bit but you will die and it's not worth the risk. Look back at what you said earlier "Don't fly what you can't afford"

That's fine, I won't fly, instead I will sit in the Tank, not moving, just one shotting infantry from a distance with no risk to myself (Because this is what DUST is about, no Risk All Reward)

Ok, say what you want, you won't be done until I give you the last word, I understand this now.

Though understand this, you are little more than a HAV scrub crybaby who doesn't understand how to not make yourself a high-value target with your paper HAV. I know this now, rather than try to adapt to a change or new situation, you'll just cry and blame others for your own mistake in overspecializing.

Allow me to close with another quote: "Overspecialize and you breed in weakness" --Maj. Motoko Kusanagi

I feel like we have heard a lot from the dedicated HAV drivers in regards to what we know about the future of tanks in Uprising. We have also heard a lot from the "Tank-Haters" that don't specialize in AV and want to see tanks nerfed and/or made less of a threat to them. But, I think, AV vs HAV balance should be determined by the people that specialize in each, respectively. So i am curious to see more of the thoughts from dedicated AV guys on the current and possible future state of HAV vs AV.

Here are my thoughts:

<----- DEDICATED AV

AV Skills:
Weaponry 5
Forge Gun Operation 5
Forge Gun Proficiency 5
Heavy Weapon Sharpshooter 5
Heavy Weapon Sharpshooter Proficiency 5
Heavy Weapon Rapid Reload 5
Heavy Weapon Rapid Reload Proficiency 5
Heavy Weapon Ammo 5
Heavy Weapon Upgrades 3
Dropsuit Operation 5 (for the lower profile)

And always run 2-3 damage mods. Basically, I am designed to kill vehicles.

Here is the kicker: I 100% AGREE WITH WHAT MANY OF THE TANKERS ARE SAYING.

They are currently far too easy to solo and/or harass into worthlessness in a battle. Hunting tanks is my favorite thing to do and would HATE to see them nerfed into being rail snipers from the redlines. As, selfishly, this decreases my fun in hunting them.

With my skills, I should be able to solo a tank, but only with the right combination of skill and luck. But both skill and luck should factor in if I, one AV guy, am able to solo a tank. It shouldn't happen often (it does now, have yet to find a tank I couldn't solo if it leaves the redzone and I dedicate myself to destroying it). I should only solo a skilled tanker when they get overzealous or make a mistake, otherwise it should take at least one more AV besides myself in a coordinated effort to finish the job. Why should they "need support" if I don't? This is the go-to argument for the masses supporting tank nerfs, is it not?

I do fear that "glass cannon" is the future of Dust and will effectively eliminate both the HAV and AV specializations as "fun, specialized, and viable" gameplay options.

I will wait to see what Uprising brings to pass judgement on the AV/Vehicle debate. But I can see why dedicated tankers are worried, everything we know so far supports their worries. And I am worried too, as the downfall of the tanks would also be the downfall of AV.

Of course, I am only speaking about people specialized in HAVs, everything militia should always be vulnerable to everyone on the battlefield because you have not taken the time or effort to dedicate yourself to it and shouldn't reap the rewards of someone who did.