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 ^^

A yes, you mean like the lightbulb, gun powder, the wheel, blade... Tell me more about how all was lost

And I'm sure all were terrible pilots. It'd be a different story if you were trying to take me out.

listen to the lore about the story of this game then come talk to me

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.

Your kidding right? You can't actually believe that the forge gun is better than a large rail turret? Can you?

Yeah, because there are NO tank defense systems available for tanks in real life.
Oh wait...
Wait...
Wait...
Yes, there are: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-2IqZhonKzU
So does that mean tanks are OP in real life?

Also, headshots never kill in one shot in real life. So why would they kill in one shot in a game.

Your sarcastic argument is flawed in so many ways...

If infantry can survive dozens of times the amount of headshots that people can survive in real life, why wouldn't tank drivers be allowed to survive dozens of times the AV that real life tanks survive? Oh wait, because tanks these days are almost unkillable by traditional AV weapons so let's instead make them a lot easier to kill than in real life because that is called balance.

20 Assault Rifle rounds to the head as opposed to 1.
3 "Missiles" on the tank as opposed to dozens (before the tank runs out of countermeasures).
Balance.

You seem to have missed my earlier post that noted that the RPG-30 can defeat the Trophy System and reactive armor. So it would most likely take 1-2 shots to kill a tank.

You seem to have missed my earlier post that noted that the RPG-30 can defeat the Trophy System and reactive armor. So it would most likely take 1-2 shots to kill a tank.

FORGE RAILGUN
STD: 1200 1107
ADV: 1320 1273
PRO: 1440 1438

so yeah, it gets to be less of a gap at proto. but the handheld weapon still outperforms the tank mounted version.

Is your post supported by the US military announcing that? Because if it's not supported by the military, that Ali Jihad could destroy an M1A1 Abrams or Bradley Fighting Vehicle with two 30 year old Russian RPG warheads, then I don't believe you at all.

I did notice your post. But since we are after all talking about real life here; how often do you think that such sophisticated AV weapons will be used against tanks? And how long do you think that it takes for them to come up with a countermeasure to the counter? If they haven't already. Who knows?

Well... those are lovely numbers you threw at me. How about you throw some more. Get back to me after you factor in DPS, ammo, range, and ADS.

Waaaaaaaaaaaat did they change forges or something? A proto forge can throw out more then three thousand damage, or are you only listing the normal forges and not the Breach ones?

Anywho, Forges and Rails both have pros and cons. *shrugs*

Really, you honestly believe that? Has it occurred to you that the weapons that modern tanks face, are relics from the Cold War? Also, the tandem warhead punched through the side armor and flooded the tank with fuel. I would be curious to see how well an Abrams would fair against a modern RPG-30. It is made specifically to deal with these tanks, it even defeats the trophy system. It's nothing short of a miracle that insurgents have not used them.

Any countermeasure will always have a counter.

If the U.S ever fights an equally sophisticated enemy, such as another first world nation. Then we would witness the use of such weapons. Until then, we will most likely see the U.S fight illiterate insurgent with dated weapons. Not exactly the best way to prove your worth.

Imagine a race between a kid's tricycle and a Harley Davidson. Should the Davidson really brag about that victory?

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?

firing intervals. same formatting as before( FORGES then RAILGUNS)

3.5 second charge, approximate 2 second interval. .3 second charge, 1.8 interval

DPS is lower initially for the forge gun.

firing interval stays the same across all tiers(note, skills have been disregarded here).

4 shots. 5 shots.

again, same across all tiers.

reload time

4 seconds. overheat time 6.

range

infinite(exception: assault forge gun. 300 meters) technically 600 meters, really, it's whatever the render distance decides for the match. pop in and disappearing targets frequently occurring issue.

ADS: Forge guns can angle up enough to hit them, tanks can't.

Forge gun has no ADS function. the railgun's reticule regularly lies about whether a shot will hit at ranges greater than 150 meters.

the forge gun's intended target is approximately 10x the size of a suit, and usually rendered from any distance.

so yeah, without skills factoring in, the Railgun gets a slight edge until it overheats, then it drops out of the running. and at significant range, the railgun has a 50/50 shot of even rendering the forge gunner, then dealing with the reticule, and finally, you deal with having been dead for the last 5 seconds because the forge gunner killed you already.


raw numbers, they're about even. slight edge to the railgun. Which is still bullshit.



only the "standard" variants were used for raw data. the breach is still leaps and bounds ahead in first shot damage. and no modifications were taken into account so that railguns even stood a chance.

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.

Yep, noticing more HAV's as well. Some of them quite good, and most of them willing to throw away lots of tanks.

Even with Proto AV, killing these poor SoBs is a full time gig. Just because someone has proto AV does not mean it's quick or easy(Well, unless they suck at fitting.. Hah).

At least it keeps me employed, lol.