I have noticed relative increase in the amount of HAV's on the battle field. Despite there claims that there departure would leave a void, on which the game would collapse itself. The prediction could not have been more false. I thereby say, good riddance.

I have noticed relative increase in the amount of HAV's on the battle field. Despite there claims that there departure would leave a void, on which the game would collapse itself. The prediction could not have been more false. I thereby say, good riddance.

I have noticed relative increase in the amount of HAV's on the battle field. Despite there claims that there departure would leave a void, on which the game would collapse itself. The prediction could not have been more false. I thereby say, good riddance.

I have noticed relative increase in the amount of HAV's on the battle field. Despite there claims that there departure would leave a void, on which the game would collapse itself. The prediction could not have been more false. I thereby say, good riddance.

wait...so you're counting newberry scrubs who dont have free lavs anymore as tankers? omg. no. there are no tankers left. no good ones anyhow. notice how all of them are solo'd by a good aver?

In the real world, unsupported armoured vehicles are never solo'd by anti-vehicle weapons. I can't belive the game would be so unbalanced that this would be possible - just another of CCP's failing i'm afraid.

That makes no sense. So you say that vehicles that are supported by infantry are able to be destroyed by a single person? I believe you have mixed yourself up.

That said, armored vehicles have frequently been disabled and even destroyed by a single person. As recent as the Iraqi war, an Abrams Tank, complete with reactive armor, was disabled by a tandem warhead fired from an RPG. A single AV personnel. One round.

In the real world, unsupported armoured vehicles are never solo'd by anti-vehicle weapons. I can't belive the game would be so unbalanced that this would be possible - just another of CCP's failing i'm afraid.

I bet there is some old veterans who would beg to differ. A few have given their life to taking a tank out solo, one has even earned a medal of honor...

Now I don't know about these days for tanks,.. but A navy Seal team did get killed with just a single rocket ( not a tank, but you get my point I hope )

That makes no sense. So you say that vehicles that are supported by infantry are able to be destroyed by a single person? I believe you have mixed yourself up.

That said, armored vehicles have frequently been disabled and even destroyed by a single person. As recent as the Iraqi war, an Abrams Tank, complete with reactive armor, was disabled by a tandem warhead fired from an RPG. A single AV personnel. One round.

Please read my above comment.

okay...disabled does not mean destroyed. more than likely, it destroyed a tread and was a mobility kill, but short of a 500lbd explosive under the tank, nothing can kill it that isn't dropped from the sky.

no abrams crewman has ever been killed in their tank. so yeah, the tanks we have now are like Shermans. Advanced should be m60s, and protos should be abrams.


an rpg cannot kill an abrams. it has never happened and never will.

okay...disabled does not mean destroyed. more than likely, it destroyed a tread and was a mobility kill, but short of a 500lbd explosive under the tank, nothing can kill it that isn't dropped from the sky.

no abrams crewman has ever been killed in their tank. so yeah, the tanks we have now are like Shermans. Advanced should be m60s, and protos should be abrams.


an rpg cannot kill an abrams. it has never happened and never will.

Damn, now ppl are saying milita HAVs count. Infainty always finden ways to keep us down

One of the first anti-tank weapons was a molotov smashed into the engine vents.

~The more you know.

and yeah, my tank can withstand enough ordinance to level a small city(multiple heavy railgun shots which have roughly the capability to level a building in current days, at less than 10GJ. the ones in game are at 80GJ) but an infantry weapon kills me in 3 shots. #CCPlogic

no, you can not have a tank immune to swarms

okay...disabled does not mean destroyed. more than likely, it destroyed a tread and was a mobility kill, but short of a 500lbd explosive under the tank, nothing can kill it that isn't dropped from the sky.

no abrams crewman has ever been killed in their tank. so yeah, the tanks we have now are like Shermans. Advanced should be m60s, and protos should be abrams.


an rpg cannot kill an abrams. it has never happened and never will.

you guys seem to be forgetting that all earth technology is lost in new eden......

I was being sarcastic again. I'm not trying to be offensive, but i'm guessing you are an American (US), though written sarcasm can be difficult to detect at times.

There are numerous examples from every war in history (since WW1) where multiple tanks (mainline MBT's too) have been destroyed by one person using rockets/missiles/mines/sticky bombs of some sort, despite heavy defenses, both air and ground.
The spectacle of WWII King Tigers being near indestructible to even enemy tanks except at point blank is an oddity that has never been repeated (and even then they had a few weaknesses, mostly design faults such as rubbish engine/transmissions, that led to their downfall).

Say that to my little jackal. bastard can passively heal through most swarms. The wonders of shield technology.



yes, often by that same ****ing infantry weapon.

How does something man-portable outperform something that has to be mounted on a tank?

I for one welcome the influx of idiot HAV operators, just two matches ago I obtained 2440 warpoints and 400,000 or so isk from driving around and murdering the crap out of 4 Somas, three Sicas, a Maddie and two aurum Gunnies...

Probably the most fun I've ever had in this build ^^