Yes av nades are effective against bad tanks. But a good tank with ANY squad support makes AV nades trivial cause you won't get in range long enough to throw more than 2.

And it's not about balance it's about fun. A guarentee you a majority of players have less fun using AV than standard infantry weapons. I'm saying make AV more fun. Or make small arms fire be able to contribute to AV. Not saying full damage but if a clip if my Scr or ar can drop 500-1000 health from a tank then you could have players work together to bring it down or hp the full AV players. It would be a more fun experience. You could then buff tanks a bit because players wouldn't hate them so much

I dont know? Be good at the game and kill people who actually have the ability to fight back?

So let me get this straight. Tank users are admitting they want to feast on a game where 90% of the population cant fight back against them? So what if 100% of the players have AV capabilities, 100% of the players have anti-infantry capability? Why would it suddenly break the game if players could actually fight back? A gameplay mechanic that relies on a majority of the players being unable to fight back is a broken mechanic.

Based on the replies here it seems this games balance relies on AV being so unattractive a play style and so un-fun that a majority of the players stay away from it. Because if a majority of the players had it, tanks would feel pointless? Am I getting this correct? Does that, logically, sound like a solid system?

you want to know why. Because one AV person can destroy us easy. if everyone had it. hell there is no way a tank would survive 2 seconds on the field. just get GUD and get real AV. hell there's a respec get some if it's such a big problem to u. so if u want to kill tanks solo get av main weapons. want to kill vehicles as a group get AV nades.

See, you are saying "easily" I never said that. Ive suggested small arms fire doing a small amount of damage to tanks so that a blob of infantry may be able to chase a tank off or help AV destroy it. If 3 or 4 dudes firing a entire clip at a tank did as much damage as a standard proto shot, it would make the game play feel a TON less broken from the infantry side. Would that suddenly break tanks? I mean, if you are driving into an area surrounded by infantry who are free to shoot at you...you kinda deserve that punishment right?

On the flip side, I suggested AV should be a little less all or nothing, like BF. This doesnt mean AV gear that destroys infantry super easy. It maybe means slightly less powerful AV gear but that doesnt reduce the infantry effectiveness as much. This would get more people to be willing to use AV. Right now very few folks do.

I rock advanced, not proto, AV gear and Im usually the only one out there attacking tanks. I would like my team mates to be able to play a role in taking tanks down. You may say "well LOL go get proto" but I also rock advanced, not proto, anti-infantry weapons and do fine there. It shouldnt be a requirement that I get proto gear to battle tanks, it isnt a requirement to do so for any other class.

And the PC battle argument is silly because, PC battles have been around, what, a week? And a what, 3% of the DUST players participate in them? I get you need to be concious about PC battles when balancing, but you cant just ignore 97% of the players experience because you feel thats not the "real" game.

The result is a good feeling yes. But that doesnt mean the act is. Like, I LOVE dropping orbitals on tanks to kill them. I once nailed 2 with one orbital. The experience was overall awesome, but was the actual "gameplay" of going into a menu and clicking a button over two red squares actually solid gameplay I could recommend?