FOR SOME REASON, SOMEONE THOUGHT IT WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA FOR HAV TURRET DAMAGE TO EQUAL HANDHELD DAMAGE

With damage nerfd so much, why don't we look at the large blaster turret?

80GJ Scattered Ion Cannon: ~1072 DPS
150.1 HP
428.6 RPM

Duvolle Tactical Assault Rifle: ~1032 DPS
78.5 HP
789.5 RPM

That's before applying damage mods and skills, but keep in mind that Large Turrets only get a 15% bonus from skills, just like all handheld weapons do. The difference is that a HAV's damage mods slightly increase RoF, but only one can be reasonably equipped to an armor HAV, none to shield.


And BTW vehicle operators, do not think that the CPM will listen to you. A number of those on the current CPM asked CCP to replace the turret damage skills with something else, like faster turret rotation.

Uprising PG and vehicle stat concerns were brought to the attention of the CPM before Uprising was released, but the CPM responded by saying that vehicle damage skills were too high, and that was the CPM's main concern, not the survivability of the vehicles themselves.

Proto tanks? Advanced tanks? Never seen one.
There is nothing from lv.1 STD HAV till lv:1 enforcer HAV only 2.5 million SP to waste.
I'm starting to be really bored of having to stay all the time near the red line, it's ridiculous that they give something to everyone for free (HP buff) and at the same time they manage to take away something to us (skills are quite useless), CCP is cheating.
Edit: the only ones that have took advantage of this buff is infantry, now MLT LAV needs 2 shots to explode.

so its clear CPM wants the TAR to beat all other weapons including HMGs at CQC, all turrets including scatter ion cannon, shotguns at CQC snipers at long range. great... welcome to TAR514.

@ Charchar :

I actually like the idea of large turrets being on par (or close) with infantry damage. A blaster might be on par DPS-wise, but that doesn't mean they need to have such huge damage per shot. They could reduce damage and increase ROF to keep the DPS but reduce the OHK factor.

Tiel Syysch made a proposal a few months back which was honestly the best fix to the vehicle/infantry dynamic anyone has put out. I asked him to revise and revamp it based on uprising numbers (That man is a spreadsheet hero and deserves so much love) I've asked him to post it on the forums for prominent vehicle users to critique when he's done, because I'm very interested to see what other people think of it.

Basically it goes along with what I said in my first post in this thread. Vehicles should really only be something people use, not something that dominates the battlefield just because of what it is. If the focus of the vehicles is not on hilariously powerful turrets (Ease of use is a separate issue entirely imo) because all of the turrets in the game except blasters will OHK infantry which is simply not really fun. It's way more fun to provide a "OH GOD RUN AWAY" factor than just "DAMNIT INSTANTLY DEAD AGAIN"

As far as AV nades go : I think the damage is honestly fine. The problem with AV nades is they restock waaaaay to quickly from nanohives and supply depots, and the throw distance is a bit too far. Change that and they instantly revert to the 'push back' role you suggested. (Unless you're lobbing them in a group, in which case the vehicle should be dying anyways IMO)

Edit : I do agree that the PG/CPU shafting is something that needs to change soonish. It's hard to fit anything on a tank when half of your fitting is taken up by your turret and you've still got 6 slots to fill :(

As far as AV nades go : I think the damage is honestly fine. The problem with AV nades is they restock waaaaay to quickly from nanohives and supply depots, and the throw distance is a bit too far. Change that and they instantly revert to the 'push back' role you suggested. (Unless you're lobbing them in a group, in which case the vehicle should be dying anyways IMO)