When can we see the prowler against infantry statistics?

i step out every day , its fine... if you cant take out a few tanks as infantry then something is really wrong with your team

me and 3 buddies + 1 engineer destroyed before an entire convoy of 15+ tanks at a choke point, BUT even with out a choke point its not that hard do destroy tanks

if you make tanks as useless junk as there are for example in 2142 then no one will use them... its fun to have strong tanks, both driving and destroying them

Please provide proof. I have never ever experienced infantry that didn't die on a direct hit with a prowler HEAT default cannon. Besides, the radii are not the same. Play vanguard, then play prowler. You'll see.

I doubt this ever happened.

Yeah you still can, because only 1/3 of the MBT are OP atm, you want to buff the other 2/3. Try to sit in a spawn with 50 ppl surrounded by 10 prowlers. Then you won't say such unbelievably stupid things.

TR is now slightly better in MBT vs MBT yet they kept their 2x effectiveness against infantry. With the bullet velocity buff and the very high angle they can get on their tank it's also much better at warding off ESF's with the main cannon, especially compared to the magrider. It has a low angle fixed gun so the esf can see exactly which way the turret is facing from far away and can hover pretty close to the magrider and laugh as it shoots under it.

Prowler has a slight edge in MBT vs MBT (look at the graph)
Prowler has twice the effeciveness vs infantry compared to other MBT's
Prowler is the best anti Air tank with the main cannon & they have the vulcan which can do anti air/tank/infantry

Nuff said...

Prowler is not the best anti air unless it's against libs and galaxies. Lolpodders, the worst air unit, are strong against Prowlers, as Prowlers need to hit them twice. Even a stupid pilot will run away after being hit once. So yes, a Vanguard will have an easier time killing lolpodders than a Prowler unless the Prowler is on your face.

Oh and:

I agree with this. However, you'd have to buff the other MBTs then.

seriously ? are you kidding ? you are surrounded that and you do NOT redeploy ?! now if anything THAT'S stupid

seriously people LEARN TO PLAY

i bet most of you complaining about vehicles are n00bs, i other than that i cant explain why would guy would say stupid stuff like this

All vehicles except the flash vs. infantry are going to be completely ridiculous. Hell, even the sunderer, the Bulldog's area that it three shots infantry is pretty large and the Kobalt might as well be a continuous laser beam.

****, just the Enforcer and Saron HRB top guns should have K/DRs of at least 4 vs. infantry. I would say the Halberd as well since it got improved similarly to the Enforcer, but I never see TR use it for whatever reason.

50 ppl should redeploy because of 10 (see my example)? Oookay. L2reason.

ok i miss read you post , i was NATURALLY thinking 50 tanks and 10 people and not the other way around
because if you have 50 people and they cant take out 10 tanks thats pathetic as well

10 tanks is nothing, but of course just about all of you need to be temporary AT

it all comes down to you dont want to ruin you precious KDR so you prefer not to engage tanks, EVEN if you could win... this isnt the game where you can have brilliant KDR if you a good player, if you do that only means you a KDR polisher and not playing the game how it is intended

Yes, they should redeploy and then when the next base gets surrounded, abandon that, too.

They should keep this up all the way to the warpgate.

Then they should log out.

I guess that's what the "you should just give up territory without actually trying to fight for it" type responders are going for?

This highlights another absolutely critical consideration for game design. First, you should avoid any kind of situation in which there is a 'forgone conclusion' (especially when ample resources are still in play by the losing side). Second, when things (inevitably) do hit a 'point of no return' the gap in time between that becoming the case and the conclusion should be minimal.

Nobody likes a forgone conclusion, we like it even less when it drags on and on and on and on and on...

...and then just ends up happening again.

Not spawning at a camped base =/= giving up the base.

Don't spawn into a cert farm, spawn at a nearby hex, run back and voila you are now behind the deployed prowlers/camping vanguards/camping Magriders and perfectly positioned to wreck alot of them with *** shots.

10 prowlers can easily shut down an entire spawn. It happens each day, I have seen it today multiple times and have done it multiple times (I play all factions each day). Defenders have no CHANCE to fight back, because they are instagibbed just from the prowlers shooting nearby walls.

Ok, I guess that's the solution if you don't want to address the fact that cert farm/camping is basically the de facto capture routine.

Spawn at the next hex over and run back? So run across wide open spaces between bases and find the enemy armor coming at you since the base flipped before you even got halfway there?

Why should 50 people have to abandon the outpost to spawn at another in the first place is the deeper issue at work, here.

That's the constant issue with this game and people on these forums. Clear cut, straightforward tactical options don't exist because of bad design/lack of foresight and you have to use some frustrating, convoluted workaround. The workaround becomes the endlessly repeated response to those trying to discuss the bad design and explain away why it shouldn't be addressed.

My coffee grinder broke last week sometime. I don't need another coffee grinder, I could put the coffee beans in a plastic bag and beat them with a hammer until ground.

You know what? No. I'm going to get a working coffee grinder because that isn't as annoying and time-consuming. It is the proper tool for the job.

Likewise, I shouldn't have to spawn at another base, I should have tools for putting up a fight and not be forced to concede just because a handful of tanks parked in specific spots that result in complete lock-down.

I'm not coming at this from a 'I like infantry, down with tanks' perspective, either. I'm generally for anything that extends the conflict and provides enjoyable pacing. Running between bases interrupts the flow of the game. The fight ending before the defender's control bar is even 20% down is a joy-kill. Fights should go down to the wire every time, if possible. There should not be a 'park 4-5 tanks at spots A-E, sit and wait' option at all.

The problem is that infantry just spew forth from their spawn room endlessly. This doesn't apply to major bases, and look how awesome it is to have to defend the SCU, etc.

But small outposts and towers....you're forced to spawn camp. It's the only effective way of capturing these places. In towers, for example, if you don't spawn camp you practically lose A (I'm talking about a more or less even fight), and those defenders will swarm to the outside and rain rockets or bullets on the attackers below, light assaults will fly and blow up your Sundy with C4, etc. How do you fix this? You put some tanks outside shooting at the infantry that dare exit the tower. So they can't escape, and your own infantry pushes them back to their force fields, and that annoying farm for both sides happen: Attackers waiting for defenders to try to exit the force field and die, and defenders killing careless attackers.

It's the way it is. This is why I think all these stupid changes to avoid spawn camping are useless...the core reason of WHY there's spawn camping in the game remains.

I think I will make a separate thread on this, as it's a bit off topic on this one.

Dislike Button ?
Prowler was best tank even before GU02 ... In right hands ...
Now can i please have a buff for my lightning ?

WRONG , You just need to hold 2/3 points for capturing the tower ... and guard them ...
Spawn camping is better option because of EXP ... errrrrrione neeeeds Exp...

Once the defender team has A under their power and free reign over the outer areas of the tower (I'm not talking about B and C, I'm talking the landing pads, turrets, etc), they shoot your tanks and your Sundys with rockets, they send LAs to blow them up, they repair turrets (especially the highly dangerous AV turrets), etc.

The best way to deal with this infantry infestation is to rain HE, lolpods, HEAT, what have you on the outside of the tower. You force the enemy to stay inside and make it more manageable for your own infantry

Sure, you still win if you don't spawn camp, but it's much, much less effective. Doesn't the tower flip faster if you have all three points? Doesn't your attack force lose less momentum if you have less casualties and you protect more of your vehicles?

Spawn camping is the only way you have to properly shut down a place and don't give the defenders a chance to recapture points and push back.

If you're facing the NC, for example, they may suddenly push out of their spawn room with lots of ScatMAXes, repair the SCU and turtle in the SCU area. This is a major setback of the attacks, and is stopped by spawn camping

The tunnels do not reduce spawn camping, they make spawn camping mandatory in more places (the end of the tunnels) to avoid the defenders to swarm the area.

At least the farm more or less ends when you blow up the SCU since they're forced to spawn somewhere else once they die (and they die by attempting to leave the forcefield to help defend the place and dying due to the spawn campers).

With small outposts and towers it just ends whenever the base flips.

I was staying away from this one for a long while. I don't operate magriders very much, so I never saw much of a difference after the patch. Until today, that is.

Was riding side by side with another guy in my outfit. He was in a lighting and I was in a magrider. He was going up, down, and all over the hills, but I could only go around? Hell, he could out maneuver my magrider as a STOCK lightning. WTF?

I says to him "Are you telling me the lightning is now better than the magrider on just about every front?"

He replies "Now you see why I never use the mag anymore, it is complete garbage now" And he was right. The only thing the Mag has now is the magburner, but it hardly gives much of an edge since the top forward speed of the magrider is like 3/4 that of any other tank.

WTF SOE? W T F?!?!?

One tank has to be better than another at killing infantry. Provided it is not also better at Anti Vehicle I see no issue.