I think if you gave ESFs a second slot, for an engineer to sit in the back and repair, that would be perfectly reasonable provided the ESF's HP was reduced to one. Then any infantryman could whip out their rifle and instant-kill it. The Flash is a perfect example that engineer repair isn't fundamentally broken. Do you think a Harasser with 50% of it's current HP would survive longer than a Harasser with it's current HP and no repair seat? How about 25%? 10%? At some point you you reach a crossover point where third-seat repair ceases to be "overpowered". I'd rather we try to balance the vehicle around that, than remove an interesting and very suitable ability for the vehicle's role.
I was giving the Harasser the benefit of the doubt and assuming that it didn't do that. A level 6 Nano-Armor can make a Harasser take 5 pretty easily.
Hay, Ender! My AP Vanny hungers for more of your sweet, sweet Scythe meats. Also Harassers are pretty ok; composite armor on them could either use a nerf in general or more specifically should lose effectiveness against AP rounds; that the things are as tough or tougher then a Lightning is a little silly. Not aggregiously so, but still. Rolling in my 2/2 tank hunter Vanny unless we get swarmed by many of the things at once, Harassers usually get turned into flying, flaming wreckage pretty quick.
Player "Zar" Overall Infantry Accuracy: 17.21% NS Decimator Accuracy: 31% Player "RHINOmkII" Overall Infantry Accuracy: 26.94% NS Decimator Accuracy: 59% I believe you were trying to make a point?
I was going to write a lengthy post, but this pretty much sums up what I was about to say. I will add this though. You want to look at the balance of something as if on a scale, one side being the positives and another being the negatives. Every strength must have a compromise somewhere else. An MBT hits hard, but it's slow and clunky. A Galaxy is a flying tank, but has an enormous hitbox and lacks damage potential. Etc. It doesn't matter what something is. It has to compromise itself in certain aspects as much as it has strengths relative to everything else in that category.
Here is the thing, where is the Harrasser's weakness? It is fast, carries 3 people, has the ability to mount weapons that can kill everything, can be repaired on the move, and can mount armor that brings it nearly in line with a MBT and surpasses a light tank. All of this for less resources than a MBT and the same as a lightning. Now of course the driver doesn't have a dedicated weapon, but the vehicle itself is a weapon easily mowing down infantry and the additional xp from his gunner. The engineer in the back has a constant stream of repairing xp so he also benefits. All things being equal, the Harrasser is armored like a tank, moves like a flash, and can constantly repair while in motion like nothing else. Of course to achieve all this it needs a dedicated crew, but the entire crew has something to do unlike riding in a Galaxy or Sunderer. Now, I don't think we should automatically take away from the speed or the firepower. Heck, I will even suggest allowing an engineer to repair in motion is an acceptable choice as he puts himself at risk for the vehicle while doing it. However, the armor factor needs a major adjustment. The harasser should be a scout vehicle, fast and able to defend itself, but it shouldn't have the longevity of lightning/MBT. I would look to RL for a solution in the fact that adding armor necessitates a drop in performance (see the uparmored Humvee's). If a Harrasser owner wants more survivability with composite armor, he must sacrifice speed and maneuverability. More armor, more loss in performance. At the highest levels the Harrasser would be significantly slower than a stock Lightning and have a large turning radius and poor climbing characteristics. If he is going to be as armored as a lightning, he is going to be much slower than one as the Harrasser isn't a purposefully designed tank and can't accommodate the radical change. This way if you want to run fast and hard, the Harasser will be a glass cannon that can run circles around the enemy but is cut to ribbons if the driver isn't careful. You want durability, your going to be more like a lumbering tank and while you may be able to go toe to toe with a Lightning, it is going to be a much less one sided fight in the Harrasser's favor. I think this would be a better way to balance things out without dramatically altering the fun aspect of the vehicle. Keep it fast and fun but give a tradeoff when you start tinkering with the survivability so it is a much harder decision than it is presently.
It requires 2 people to man one gun. A pair of Lightnings or a MBT with a manned turret both have much more firepower than a single Harasser. 'course, it has some advantages over either of those two options, which may make it more worthwhile in some situations, but it's weakness is immediately apparent.
Skyguard is no better at killing harassers than a super basilisk sundy only shooting one of the basilisks. No vehicle is "ok" at killing something if it requires more vehicles to actually kill it before being killed. A solo skyguard should never, ever kill an AV solo harasser. Highly specialized mbt? Seriously? So you want to be able to farm infantry and destroy AV vehicles too? You realize an AV harasser isnt that good at killing infantry, right? The amount of skill required to hit infantry with a halberd on a harasser while the harasser is moving perpendicular to the target or swaying is insanely high. In fact its no better or worse than just a gunner on an mbt trying to farm infantry with anything other than a PPA, marauder, or kobalt. If you know you're going to be fighting against vehicles, you should at the very least have empire specific av secondary/halberd + heat. Two of those heat shots will kill the repairing gunner in the back seat with splash, even with flak 5 if they hit in the rear. Aimbot aim? haha good joke. 90% of halberd or av harassers cant anything past 20-30 meters, in my experience. You and your gunner need to learn to aim if you cant kill them or chase them off the field in that range. AP wont help you if you miss. If you and your gunner actually hit your shots, you will kill that harasser before the 3rd AP round gets reloaded. The truth is you have a secondary weapon as the only real means of combat on the harasser. Those two people could be in two AP lightnings, they could be in a lib or in an mbt and do the same amount of damage as they do with the harasser to vehicles.
We shouldnt even be comparing a dune buggy to a tank in the first place - there is the problem. Also, a crew of two is not a disadvantage - in fact, it is an advantage. One guy focuses on driving, the other gunning. Each player is 100% focused on his or her task instead of dividing attention to driving and shooting.
Basilisk is also quite a good weapon like Skyguard is quite a good weapon. Why get into, "being funny and only using things that are obviously overpowered," territory. MBT has many potential configurations and AV/AV is one of the most specialised alongside AI/AI. You should roll with HEAT/Flak, or the default HEAT/HMG and expect to not just get facerolled every time you pull one, not even lone wolfing, by the latest flavour of the month toy. And in my experience an explosive round for the MBT cannon is a good choice anyway against harrassers since it gives you a good chance of killing the repairing engi. The point of harrassers is that they do not need very good aim since they get very close, and against MBT they have a large slow moving target. The amount of damage is not the point as I said before. They could be in two AP lightenings but they would be much easier to kill and wouldn't even be able to get away from HA with dumb fire if they over extended.
Why shouldn't we? It's still a vehicle, no? It costs resources, and consumes people to pilot it. Also, I never said two people was a disadvantage. I merely stated that a Harasser obviously has less firepower-per-person than either the Lightning or the MBTs... I'm not sure how you could conclude it doesn't.
So we're spending 6 posts just coming to the conclusion that we agree with one another? Well, alright.
The very fact that you think an mbt should be using flak as the default secondary loadout shows how worthless your opinion is in this discussion. I won't even bother pointing out how wrong you are with regard to av harasser strategy and gunner skill.
