Do you prefer HEAT or HE for AI work?

If using a force multiplier requires so much skill and is so amazing, why don't you try to auraxium a normal infantry weapon with the same KDR as you have with your MBT main cannon (29+ with HEAT)

AP on my tank. HE on my lightning.

Also C4 is neither free nor easy to get on target. As an average of the last year, for example, I use 3.6 bricks per kill. That's also factoring in a bunch of infantry kills because I do so enjoy tossing it through windows and over walls.

The kicker? I'm in the top 5% of kills by usage for C4 according to the DA stat site. Not only do I spend almost half my extremely valuable infantry resources per kill, but I'm better than at least 95% of other players in regards to kill per brick.

In my experience, conc grenades are the best infantry:kills ratio as they are just freaking nuts.

Because no one in their right mind wants to play in the mud with the infantry peasants.

This is definitely part of the problem. Joe Pubbie doesn't see a reason why he needs to spawn several bases away to spawn a tank, and realistically, even if he does, there's no way he can take out all of the tanks if it's a tank zerg, as zergs have to be counter-zerged, which requires pulling several tanks, which you can't always rely on unless you're in an outfit.

Regardless, the fact this can be done fairly easily, without any sort of real coordination, but requiring actual coordination to stop it, is a problem that I feel needs to be addressed. Make some fighting spaces infantry-only by putting them underground, deposit some Czech Hedgehogs around the base so that vehicles can't easily access the kinds of shooting lanes that'd let them just hang back and spam into the base from a distance, and so on.

It's just too easy to wreck infantry face right now. And it always boosts one's K/D, which makes all the kiddies who think K/D is the only stat that matters happy.

That sure ain't any of the servers I've been on then. I see way more tank zerg than I do armor battles.

The problem also isn't Engy/HA either, though. Rockets are meant to be a deterrent, but it does take quite a few rockets to take down a tank - I think even a lightning generally needs at least 3-4, if not more, unless you're getting hit with dumbfire Decimators. Even then, of course, it relies on the HA having a lockon rocket launcher - not all of them will (especially the newer ones), though obviously many of them will.

Things being expensive is part of the problem, too, but perhaps that will change if every resource gets pulled into one common resource pool, as the devs have hinted at, though costs would definitely need to be adjusted, depending on what the caps are. If we just combine all three and leave amounts/costs unadjusted, that'd leave 2250 points to spend, and 450 resources would then be 20% of that pool. They did say they'd remove acquisition timers when they did this as well, so it does mean in theory you could pull back to back to back tanks or aircraft, but at the same time, it makes its "cost" be much lower as long as you get a good flow of resources since you don't have to sit there with your thumb up your *** if you get blown up a minute or two after getting it.

Look at the stats. Now tell me what do you think I use?

I dunno, I find that "solo" I can regularly take out 2+ vehicles in a vehicle zerg per respawn. ("Solo" simply meaning it didn't require coordination. I still rely on nearby friendlies (some in vehicles, most not) distracting the enemy vehicles.) So it's possible to efficiently widdle down their vehicle supply, but just like with a large infantry zerg you're not going to win the battle singlehandedly. Usually. I mean...I've severely reduced many zerg forces' advances by shredding their respawn capabilities and aggressively taking out their vehicles before they steamroll and become too powerful.

PS2 is a pretty deterministic game, and every 2+ vehicles I kill are that many fewer at the base attacking my friendlies, who will then survive longer to deal more damage themselves. So it all feels like it matters, it's just that ideally you'd want to coordinate more of your teammates to pull vehicles (since it's a team game, and you want the players on your team not to be making gross errors in judgement (aka spawning as infantry) which prevents you from winning.)

I only use AP cannons on my Vanguard and Lighting as I am in a tank to hunt vehicles (or MAXes which are kind of like vehicles). I also feel a lot less ...dirty... about killing infantry with AP rounds given it almost has to be a direct hit.

I used to prefer the HEAT because of the general purpose nature of the weapon. The changed when GU08 (I think) went in and the AP rounds got an armor mitigation bonus. I haven't tried the viper since beta as I didn't like the huge arcing tradectory - apparently this has been changed since.

Dude that is a lie and you admit it yourself in your second sentence. Your saying there are "way more tank zerg" meaning more then tank vs. tank meaning they exist.

No, "Tank zerg" means a zerg of rolling tanks. It doesn't mean more tank vs. tank.

But just so it's nice and clear, by "tank zerg" I mean a group of tanks that rolls up and shells the crap out of bases, meaning the infantry's choice is "leave or get farmed," until the side getting rolled can pull their own tanks and go fight them, which is usually not before several territories swap hands. Actual tank zerg countering is basically limited by what the nearest tank-pullable base on the lattice is.

And suffice to say, I see a lot more of that than I do of actual tank vs. tank fighting.

Real gentleman uses AP rounds to engage vehicles and vehicles only. In case there ain't secondary gunner to deal with C4 fairies, C4 suicide runner medics, all kinds of nasty engineers and rocket spamming heavys, said gentleman will calmly change to secondary gunner seat to deal with them.

Real gentleman doesn't even touch spammy weapons like HE or HEAT.

Real men use AP, which is why I prefer HEAT.

I use AP. You can use it to kill tanks so you can get better spots to shoot inf

I prefer AP rounds, so much more effective; and when you encounter that pesky tank, you have more survivability since everyone seems intent on carrying HEAT or HE.

Easily most of the time its the infantry's own damn fault, It just amazes me how lazy players keep spawning at a location(with no armour avail)that is obviously being farmed by armour yet can't be arsed spawning else where to pull armour from a region right next door, even more amazing after such a event happening they then proceed to charge over vast open territory with next to no armour support when they should know its highly likely the same armour that was camping them before is probably on its way to meet them, helios solar<->Excavation Site last night on briggs was a amazing farm for nc armour last night.

In your explanation here you once again admit that tank vs. tank battles exist. Your keep trying to argue with me with evidence that makes me right. So once again my original statement still stands and let me paste the whole convo so fully understand what we are talking about....

Dark Pulse said: ↑

“Not my point. When was the last time you saw a tanks pulled to fight other tanks?”

Louey said: ↑

“Uuuuh the last time I played, the time before that and the time before that(infinitely repeating).”
Dark Pulse said: ↑

“That sure ain't any of the servers I've been on then. I see way more tank zerg than I do armor battles.”

“Dude that is a lie and you admit it yourself in your second sentence. Your saying there are "way more tank zerg" meaning more then tank vs. tank meaning they exist.”

All I'm saying below is I see tanks pulled to fight other tanks every time I play. You reply that the don't exist on your server yet in the VERY NEXT SENTENCE you say you see more tank zerg then then armor battles fully admitting that armor battles exist making your first sentence a lie. I proceed to tell you that and then you reply with telling me what a tank zerg is which has NOTHING to do with my original point. Not only that but you continue proving my point by saying "until the side getting rolled can pull their own tanks and go fight them" once again confirming(With your own words!) that tanks get pulled to fight other tanks. I could easily go on to your server and record tanks being pulled to fight other tanks. But why would I do that when your admitting it already happens?

Sure, if we go by absolute strictest definitions, as you seem to be doing, there's plenty of armor battles - after all, a tank fighting a tank is, in the strictest sense, an armor battle. That's not what I'm after, though.

• When do you see tanks pulled and fighting inbetween two territories? Almost never.
• When do you see tanks pulled in response to a tank zerg? Almost always.

You never see those tank vs. tank battles out in a relatively open chunk of the field anymore. Some side is always hammering in at the base, and the side getting hammered winds up pulling tanks to counter them. This is damn near the only time armor vs. armor combat is happening in Planetside 2 lately. Some side comes in with tanks, infantry gets farmed, eventually a counter-push is organized, because nobody bothers to form armor columns unless they feel like they're going to smoke some squishies or unless their own territories are falling like dominoes. Why? No certs if you don't do it the other way, and as we all know, everyone's a slave to the great cert machine until you've gotten everything you need and have a high BR.

Going by the strictest sense of the term, yes, armor battle exist, because obviously the only way you're going to get rid of a mass of tanks is with tanks of your own, aircraft, or a hell of a lot of AV Turret Engies. But they're almost never two groups of tanks that just happen to encounter each other on the field, one side is always pulling tanks in response to the other shelling the crap out of them. This is the point of my argument, which is what you seem to be failing to grasp. I'm not trying to say armor vs. armor battles don't actually exist (obviously, they do), I'm trying to say you never, ever see them happening relatively far from a base anymore.

Tanks rarely find groups of other tanks anymore outside of a base that's being bombarded. There's no real open-field battles that's relatively away from a base where they're fighting another armor column, like I'd been a part of during closed beta. I'd say at least 80% of the time, when tanks fight other tanks, it's to push back a tank zerg that's shelling their base, and up until that happens, the attacking armor column can pretty much roll face.

To me, that's not an armor battle, even though in a technical sense it absolutely is. To me, it's counter-zerging with a tank zerg of your own, because whatever side wins is just going to push the other side further along the lattice, until either they are destroyed, or get too close to the warpgate, because warpgates guarantee MBTs which will smoke those small, cheap Lightnings (which are generally the bulk of the zerg force).

Is it clear now? Or am I going to have to read another post of "You say it doesn't exist, but then you say it does?"

You can call me out for using the "strictest definitions" when your using extreme exaggerations to prove your point. You could of just left it when I said yeah I see tank battles every day, it was your choice to take if from there. I honestly still think you are still exaggerating by adding "almost" cause it happens fairly often but yes far from the majority. Rather then debating an amount like this why can't we just say "I'd like to see more tank battles?". Cause believe it or not I'd like the same thing.

I think a major problem with it is base layout and design. Currently the bases are far to close to each other to have any decent tank on tank battles. The majority of the large tank on tank battles will be influenced by infantry residing at a base. Whats sad is it appears they are doing it again with the Amerish revamp. Allot of those bases are a stones throw away from each other sadly.

I prefer HEAT since it lets me be more versatile if a situation arises. Though I will admit that I haven't played with the HE. I know a lot of higher levels decimate people with the viper...

I just don't get it though. I too enjoy tanking, but I don't pull a tank to help steam roll. If you aren't needed then isn't it better to go be useful elsewhere? I don't think it's that tankers kill infantry, I think it's more that a large portion of tankers just focus on infantry, which is due to them just wanting to tank.

Perhaps they don't want to use a tank because it isn't THEIR play style. Easymode is a relative term, tanks aren't exactly hardmode. You might be good at tanking, but that is what you want to do, not everyone wants to tank. The problem comes from everyone wanting to have fun, yet other forms of combat are interfering with their play styles. I enjoy tanking, but if it gets to the point where there are only infantry to fight then guess what, I'm going to hop out of my tank and have a good infantry fight. After all, you should be able to pull another tank once you're done fighting as infantry.

I see a ton of threads talking about how this game is vehicle and infantry combat. Vehicle users complain about the amount of infantry shooting at them, and infantry complaining about the amount of vehicles spamming them. No one wants to hop out of their comfort zone and do what needs to be done. If there are too many infantry firing at your tank, then you are being useless and probably should play as infantry and vice versa if you're infantry and are trying to fight a vehicle zerg. Eventually we will have areas where all forms of combat will be able to contribute equally, but until then, do what needs to be done. The battlefield is dynamic, but are you?