Because you can only have so many players on the battlefield at once. When you start seperating the anti-infantry in order to do anti-vehicle, infantry warfare can get easily get lopsided in favor of the team with the tank.

In essence, tankers want their tank to do as much damage and take as much damage as a full squadron of protos. All manned by only 1 guy with a fat wallet. With this logic, why be infantry at all? It'll be Tank 514.

We have to deal with the same thing in all the other vehicles. While dropship pilots are waiting for fighters, we can wait for mtacs or whatever they're called

What I like to do in a group with dropships or LAVs, is more or less rotate who calls it in, and who does what.

Well I am all for AV, people pull out tanks and I have fun destroying them.

I do believe the AV weapons are right where they should be however, there should be more tanks available.

Gunlogis & Madrugars belong in an advanced class. CCP needs to come up with some sort of a proto tank with 2 or 3 additional high and low slots, and maybe 2000-3000 more HP.

As a anti social lone wolf, that would mean my speccing into tanks would be worthless, as i would either have to let some random drive my tank and no doubt loose it, or drive him around while he racks up the kills, which doesnt sound like much fun

Given that the game already rewards tankers to work as team with 3 men in it (look outs, gunners), im already at a disadvantage by not squading with capable people, which is my choice, as it should be, the game does and should reward teamplay, but not force it down our throats

"just for the record, although i play on my own, i do drive around with the team and protect (try) while they cap objectives etc"

As to the argument of the driver not getting kills, I think there's a simple solution:
If you're the driver, vehicle kill assists should be +50 instead of +35

And as to HAV drivers having no way to get kills with the "seperate turret" system, I think the solution should be similar to assault dropships.
The front small turret on all HAVs should be controlled by the driver

Same deal with assault dropships, only the chance to crash is multiplied greatly because you're flying.
Also somewhat the same with LAVs- you can only kill people you're driving straight at.

To see behind you, switch to third person.

And you want to know the difference between the driver controlling a large turret and a small turret?

Most of the tank drivers need to realize they aren't special just because their stuff is expensive, so they aren't entitled for their vehicles to work much more differently than everything else.

Which is a good thing- they won't crash if you go into first person

Which is a good thing- they won't crash if you go into first person

use 3rd person, dumbass

Why do you think none of the other vehicles use it in most situations?

I've done everything

Teamwork

use it

Don't care; considering that I suggested for HAVs to be buffed if that happened, and for the driver WP system to be redone (2 points you obviously ignored), I would probably go with driving

I think both of us would appreciate outside input

I don't see a problem with the driver controlling a turret- just not one that powerful

That being said, you're right that HAVs are the only solo option for vehicles atm, and the argument is also right that HAVs are weak right now.
So until we get "one-man only" vehicles, HAVs should stay the way they are, and small turrets should be buffed so using teamwork is more effective.

Now I'm off to play dust because I'm tired of this argument

Not him, but driver. I love playing closely with other people and I would be far more satisfied with giving my brothers in the guns the best possible ride and lots of opportunities to put 'em to work than racking up a positive K/D myself. Being able to fully focus on reading the battlefield while they can fixate on aiming and observing would also raise the potential effectiveness of the vehicle.

Mutual reliance relationships also foster some of the best moments in gaming, they really do. There are hiccups and randoms become a shaky bet to entrust yourself to but that's just a matter of finding yourself some people to buddy up with, acquire some regulars.

Separation of duties also leads to a better tank all round when you really mesh with your crew. On top of all aspects of the vehicle seeing more focused attention there's also a morale side to it: as the driver you don't want to let your gunners down, as a gunner you're trying extra hard to not disappoint your driver.

Right. It doesn't exist or have any indicator of it's stats other than 'buffed significantly' and it's categorically 'worthless'. This clearly isn't about looking at it from a gameplay perspective but one of personal preference, the outright dismissal isn't for a valid enough reason. Well, unless it's some notion about the simultaneous existence of team tanks and solo tanks phasing out your preferred role, the latter. Ideally it shouldn't. Solo will be more popular for pubs while team tanks will be of greater value in PC, that it's not balanced around 1 person using it means it can be buffed up into the mighty engine of destruction that a tank is meant to be.

Frankly it's initial popularity doesn't matter. That it has the capacity to play the role of a heavier tank is what matters, a HAV to be reckoned with at the cost of more people behind it. Won't be popular at first, no, necessitated teamwork never is when there's an alternative. There is some calling for it though, both in playstyle preference and the solution it provides to one of the problems of heavily empowering a vehicle.

Consider it as it's own thing, in a holistic light please. Ya ain't gonna be strapped down and forced to drive it if you don't want to.

For the purpose of that consideration just pretend we have a game mode that's actually good, where HAVs have sway in aiding the push against a focused defence or in holding it, stopping any such advances. I say this because what we currently have is pretty bad all 'round and what vehicles can potentially do doesn't matter much in them. It's a very poor template for gauging vehicular capabilities since it doesn't call for most of them.

Can someone fill me in to why people thing armor HAVs are way better than shield HAVs?

The way I see it, when used correctly (armor tanks with blasters at short range, shield tanks at long range) shield tanks are more effective. Armor tanks get hit by lots of explosive AV in close quarters, while shield tanks can just see the AV coming, duck behind corners and have their shields regen (much more quickly than shields on armor tanks)

I've had more luck with a shield HAV (everything militia except for a STD missile turret) than an armor HAV (mostly STD mods mixed with militia, and a standard blaster)

But teamwork should be well rewarded- that's why I think small turrets need an all-around buff

AV is already much better when using teamwork, because they can cut off a vehicle's escape

void i drive llavs and i heal tanks, i carry a forge gun with me.

Think we're going to have to agree to disagree on this one. I think they'd have a very viable place in the scheme of things. So long as they do their popularity isn't of prime importance.

Why do you keep bringing up Enforcers, anyway? The problems with that tank have no relevance to what we're discussing that I can see.

not getting the feed back you hoped for? tankers should have a chaff module. keep off swarms for 10 seconds. also it would be sweet for AV to damage tracks and weapons on a tank.

Did you read my post? Buffing small turrets doesn't force teamwork in vehicles- it rewards it.

And I already clarified that tanks should only be changed once there are more solo options for drivers

Funny. I thought the problem was simply that it's an overpriced turd that can't even do it's primary function right.

My friend uses a Falchion and kicks ass.

I can't believe they are bringing in fighter jets, the one thing I didn't want. How can we kill them? They're too fast for swarm launchers. If you put something that has a 100% auto gun, that is unfair for the jet, making it an OP gun.

And one half-arsed implementation of something completely different to what's being proposed invalidates it right off the bat?

Btw, tanks are good at tanking- the MMORPG term
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=tank
Second definition

That's not the most useful of answers. Unless you're really going with the whole angle that if trying something different failed once, don't try anything different again?

If that's right, eh...

If it ain't, elaborate please.

I'm talking about the basic concept- hold the enemy's attention, while your allies can move in for the real damage

Just putting my ideas out there, but I think that if someone puts a mil isk into a vehicle, then it should not go down easy unless the group attacking it has a combined isk cost of ~1mil, that way, you fell as if an investment was lost because the other team invested the same or even more to try and destroy you. a tank on tank battle, for instance, seems fair because they are similar in cost, and it comes to the skill of the player.

comment on what you think, just a roaming dropship lost in the forms

The problem..... proto av vs standard tank. Imbalance.

Balance? PROTO TANK vs PROTO AV issue resolved.

At least untill ccp gives us our proto tanks that are prob going to suck.

Proper proto tank

A LOT more cpu/pg

A LOT more ehp

2 slots one high and one low.

If a solo HAV pilot is outnumbered by average (non militia) AVers, then yes, they should destroy them the majority of the time.
However, small turrets need to be more effective so a full tank is actually a much bigger threat than a solo tank.

Another question: should forge guns have a bigger bite than large railguns? I say yes, because heavies are very slow, and more vulnerable than HAVs

Nope

I never said 2 AVers should instantly kill the HAV- I'm saying they should eventually kill it before it kills them.

And again- >>>AVERAGE<<< tankers, im a dumbshit. If you're good and have a good fit, you're fine. The fact is, most HAVs I destroy are bad fits with bad drivers.

Who said within 10 seconds?

The only time I've ever seen it are from the worst of the worst HAVs

Btw void, why do you make a thread for discussion between AV and vehicle users if all you want is for HAVs to be godmode?

Have you ever run AV?

And you're an idiot if you think everyone agrees HAVs need a buff

This.
This.
This.
This.
This.
This, Would Solve ALL our Arguments.

Except the Windari Logi Suit Problem.
Change Them Bonuses!

First off a disclaimer, I have not read the entire thread so if I miss someones idea/suggestion which touches on this sorry and please link me the post so I can read up

In this build I have advanced Swarms, Advanced AV nades, Fluxes and a Militia Forge.
In prior builds I've spend SP into HAVs up to Proto (the chassis, never got everything on it proto'ed)
I've also flown a fair bit, tho I won't claim to have ever been all that great at it, I was always better at gunning than flying.

So that's my background, having provided the context I'll elaborate on where I find myself when it comes to AV in Uprising..

Most vehicles, even the dreaded and newly buffed "death taxi" are what I like to call pointatas.
The Logi LAVs can hold their own against my STD swarms but unless they're staying in motion anything else/anything better tends to pop them. I have also encountered fewer than 10 HAVs this build (outside of PC matches) which could stand up to the focused AV attention of 1-2 Mercs... unless we include those sniping from hills deep in the redline.
Note: The above assessment is not caused by encountering mostly militia HAVs, those are chewed up on average in less than 2 minutes by use of 1 STD swarm launcher sometimes requiring a resupply but frequently not.

For infantry that make use of the soft spots on vehicles the single greatest challenge is keeping the vehicle in range once it starts taking damage. Used on a soft spot 2-3 EXO AV nades will take out 80% or better of HAV fits deployed outside of PC battles. Which means one guy who gets close kills the HAV w/o support or reload.

There most certainly are fits that trump this and perform much better but they're not frequently seen.
The most common situation is that effective LAVs run people over, effective HAVs snipe, and effective DS do strafing runs and are limited to only certain maps. in this case "effective" does not mean employing the tactics most useful to the team it means "not going boom within 3-5 minutes of deployment".

I don't have any current suggestions to offer but that's my overall experience. Vehicles are rather papery, except the few that can soak up abuse from 3+ infantry and keep going generally unphased. <--- And that is without use of any type of Proto AV.

0.02 ISK
Cross