Harrassers are balanced.

Only 3 problems I have with the Harasser, composite armor gives it too much armor, they can repair while going full speed, and have as much range as an MBT or Lightning even though their speed clearly suggests they should be within 50-75 meters. MBT's, they are not single person vehicles, having a gunner more than doubles your fire power and I personally enjoy having a gunner it is just that nobody wants to gun for my decked out Vanguard, especially if they are engineers.

I understand you are saying that 3 MBTs are more powerful than a full harasser but in all honesty that is fully balanced considering that 3 MBTs is more than triple the cost of a single harasser.

Why would people use a harasser instead of 3 MBTs though? Well this isn't a perfect world where everyone has invested into a MBT and there are plenty of people low on resources or on a vehicle timers looking for something more productive to do than run around on foot.

Filling up a harasser may certainly not have more firepower than three MBTs without a secondary however it is certainly a lot more conservative as well as making the most of its resource cost.

The harasser is the only fun vehicle left in the game, fun to drive and fun to gun. Perhaps, the only thing that needs to change is its AI potential. The Fury and the Marauder are too effective killing infantry, far worse than the lightning + HE rounds ever were. The AV capacity is fitting. All AV variants perform well and if they aren't to your liking the common pool Halberd is a perfectly acceptable option.

I get the feeling this thread is full of 1/2 tankers venting their frustrations.

By your logic a Galaxy which can use 5 people, 4 gunners and 1 pilot should be the most powerful vehicle in the game...

Your logic is flawed.

Just to be clear - I was in a Magrider ((Unsure if your post thinks I was a Vanguard with the Enforcer Secondary.

I'm not deliberately miss-stating my missed shots.. I know that it took the vulcan gunner of the harrasser 2 clips (maybe 1.5-1.75 clips) to kill me.

The AP round for the magrider reload is 3.75 (and I have -.3 reload (level3)).. and I don't believe I got a 4th shot off.. it was reloading.

So:
Fire1-zerosec
Fire2-3.5(rounding)
Fire3-7.0
Diedsomewherehere
Fire4-10.5 (didn't get this off)



Take from this what you will... It just seems that a 2man crew vehicle, vs a 2man crew vehicle with only 1 gun.. should have a chance... Given misses and such.
I stated the amount of missed shots, etc...
I believe I also stated that I//We did not get the harrasser below 50% hp ((or it had repaired above 50% by the time the death screen came up))

This seems not fair, given number of guns on an MBT, and resource cost of 450, vs harrasser is.. 300? (Less then 450)

Exactly.

I do not disagree - Vanguards are amazing, especially with a competent enforcer gunner... I LOVE playing my NC with a fully certed Vangaurd over the magrider.((I got 13k certs from that weird refund awhile back))

I just don't love the NC on the server I play on.

Err, perhaps open land was't the best way to word it.

The land north of Regent Rock ((South middle indar)), just north of that BIG *** rock right next to the tower -- that entire area .. with all the little hills, trees, and rocks.

I just meant open in that.. No major buildings, no obscenely large rocks, no cliffs, or cliff-faces.

Agreed...

and especially not a lib!.. god, try killing a harrasser with an ESF.. assuming you don't **** up and hit a tree, take you just about all your rockets AND rotary.. if you can manage to beat the autorepair, let alone an engineer in the back seat.

No.. He's generally pretty good. I also believe I stated the number of hits he got.. It's hard to hit a 50%+speed harasser doing circles around you (while your spinning as well to keep front facing), while the harrasser, and you, are hitting bumps//little rocks.. and yet, the vulcan wins.

Except if you bothered to read the post, you'd see that.. in this scenario, the MBT should win, or, if played badly, should at least damage the harrasser more then 40-50%... and not just get utterly dominated.

Completely agree. The weapon +the speed and mobility is the problem.

Don't get me wrong, I'd like there to be some sort of weaker hitting lockon that could actually get a bead on those things.. because I don't actually *feel* like there is ANY counter to a harrasser atm, except another harrasser with a better gunner... or an AP prowler from really far away... and really good aim.

Just quoting this post for epicness. Thank you sir.

Now please buff my lib to be like the harrasser and I'll be happy.. Oh.. Wait.. I actually want the game to be balanced. So don't do this.

If Harassers stuck to the Halberd and farmed vehicles they might've gotten away with it for awhile longer. Instead more and more are making the mistake of using the Fury/ES AI weapons (Marauder).

The fastest/best way to lose your toys in this game is to repeatedly piss off the infantry zerg.

You said you had a gunner with a Saron as well right? If my Harasser takes half a Saron clip, I'm out of there, at that point I'm atleast at 2/3's health and I'm sure his driver has noticed by now that I'm around.

1/2 Tanks should be the prey of Harassers, not only to punish bads to not bring a gunner along, but also the resource cost isn't that different and you NEED a second person to properly operate a Harasser.

Also if this post is specifically against the Vulcan on a Harasser killing your MBT, you lost your advantage when he was allowed to get within 100m of you, plain and simple. Either you were too alone, or not aware enough of your surroundings.

As far as I'm concerned I hope you nerfers don't con anyone into touching the Harasser, its what Vehicle combat in PS2 SHOULD be. The MBTs need a rework...would love to see them be 3/3 but I know that wouldn't happen because people couldn't have their 1man tanks anymore(lol, whats a lightning?).

Also as far as your comment about the Liberators, IMO they need a rework as well...something to keep them relatively out of the line of fire of low-cost ground based AA(Lockons, Bursters) as far as damage is concerned, and make the ESF actually have a role as an air superiority fighter, instead of a 1man farm machine...ESFs should be fighting over airspace for them and their Libs to use, not attempting to farm ground targets.

That a vehicle with more people in it shouldn't always win.

A hit from a MBT should not only destroy a harasser outright, but should make the whole map shake as a warning to other harassers. It's ridiculous to think a minigun can even penetrate armour and when this hits your dune buggy



travelling at about 2000 feet per second, the comparison just gets more ridiculous. Tiny little bullets out play one of these rounds. Let's not talk about the SABOT round that travels at 4000 feet per second designed to send molten shrapnel flying everywhere cutting the crew into pieces - but all that super heavy armour on the harasser is made of different stuff right? That's why they didn't bother to put it on the tankls...wait, what?

The logic fails completely. SOE's motto is "Let's just make **** up"

And B17 bomber crews should never have needed fighter escorts because they outnumbered the BF-109 by 10 -1 in crew compliment, right? This has got to be one of the most ******** arguments on these forums when the amount of crew dictates the effectiveness of the vehicle. Presumably then when I introduce my new vehicle into the game, "The ******inator" which requires the entire server to crew it we just press a button and the other two factions instantly die, over and over? So if we put 4 people in a tank then we're good to go again and can easily destroy harassers?

The Harasser should be just that - harassing. Hit and run, get in and out quick. Very weak armour but high speed and agility.

No, I said that if two vehicles with similar roles clash, the one requiring twice the manpower to operate should come out on top, you're just interpreting my comments to suit your arguments.

No I'm saying, again, That a vehicle with more people in it shouldn't always win.

what is your problem?