Or it could be that the Marauder does the same thing as the Fury, just slower and with no damage against vehicles.
Well I can't bring a Fury on the best tank in the game (Prowler), but I can bring a Marauder. Which is partly why it's not fair to compare the Fury's ~40 KPH on Sunderers with the Marauder's 68 KPH on Prowlers. But well...that's a pretty sizable advantage still
Lets do a little comparison. Here you have unique users and KPH: PPA - 1053 - 70.3 Canister - 213 - 66.75 Marauder - 232 - 55.51 I'll throw in the AV secondaries for good measure: Saron - 848 - 18.9 VS Halberd - 430 - 25.14 Enforcer - 866 - 22.05 NC Halberd - 589 - 25.62 Vulcan - 374 - 14.8 TR Halberd - 929 - 22.24
3400 - Supernova PC | KPH | Daily Average: 18.66 4000 - P2-120 HEAT | KPH | Daily Average: 22.91 3700 - Titan-150 HEAT | KPH | Daily Average: 19.05 the Prowler makes up for that with its primary
Because the difference between 18 and 22 is roughly the same as the difference between 55 and 70? Lets add everything up and see where we land. KPU: Main VS - 26.34 NC - 21.78 TR - 29.17 Secondary VS - 26.76 NC - 23.88 TR - 20.75 Total VS - 53.1 NC - 45.66 TR - 47.09 KPH: Main VS - 73.77 NC - 71.13 TR - 94.58 Secondary VS - 217.83 NC - 198.16 TR - 179.1 Total VS - 291.6 NC - 269.29 TR - 273.67 Does not look all that impressive any more.
From my experience the Hallberd is to weapon of choice for a static gunline. While it doesn't gain the benefits of anchor it still got the range and speed to go decently with it. If you have a slightly lighter battlefield I would suggest equiping your prowler with a racer chassi and wield the G30. It's a fast enough to engage a Magrider in CQC where the magriders mobility advantage isn't as great. Adn the combo of AP shells and the G30 really pack a punch when you get close. The only problem is that you become quite vulnerable as you charge forward. But withthe correct terrain and some practise you can do some real hurt.
Yeah but what are you trying to say? Nobody here denies that the PPA is about 11% better than the other AI secondaries, and deserves tweaking (though I haven't dissected the upcoming changes enough to know if it's going to be the right tweaking.) Either way, what I said is true that we can't really directly compare Marauders with Furies since they exist on different vehicles but if we did compare them this is how we'd do it. MBT Basilisks are 12.6% (VS), 12.6% (NC), and 0% (TR) more effective than Sunderer Front Basilisks. (KPH, Aug 18 through Oct 03, source: Oracle of Death) Sunderer Furies have 40, 43, and 43 KPH (by faction; front Fury only) If we assume the same relative KPH bump when this weapon is on a tank as the basilisk gets, that becomes: 45, 49, and 43 KPH (by faction) The Marauder's 68 KPH is much higher than that 43 KPH we'd compare it with. Again, I don'tfeel we can make this direct comparison, but this roundabout way of looking at the data certainly fits with my own impressions of both weapons. The Marauder is a fantastic AI choice, and the PPA being 11% overpowered doesn't change that.
So what about another weapon that both the MBT and the Sunderer has, the Kobalt. It is around 60 % more effective on the Prowler. 59-68 % depending on where you take your values. What happens if you add another 60 % on top of the 43 KPH of the Fury? You get 68.8. So with the same method we have reached the conclusion that the Fury and the Marauder are equally effective. So either some of our maths is off or the basic assumption of how you compare effectiveness of weapons between vehicles is flawed. Anyway, it's not really that relevant. The point is that the Marauder is a underwhelming weapon on the Prowler. You are better off with the Halberd for something versatile or the Kobalt for AI since it's equally effective and 150 certs cheaper.
Sure I could buy that the Fury is equal with that sort of comparison. It's weak evidence either way, as I've pointed out, and doesn't change the fact that the weapon is plenty capable. If you're choosing a weapon based on cert cost, well then go for it. But that doesn't mean the Kobalt is better, just that it's cheaper to unlock which isn't really a factor in what we're discussing. The thing we do know for a fact is that the Halberd is flat-out worse than the Marauder for AI work by a strong margin. It's a great weapon overall and like most AV secondaries it's not bad against infantry. But when you compare it with Kobalt or Marauder, it is bad for AI work and you're much better off taking an AI secondary if you're expecting heavy infantry presence.
That's why I used the word versatile. The Halberd is good against armour and decent against infantry. The Marauder and Kobalt are better against infantry but utterly useless against vehicles. As in they do zero damage. The Marauder doesn't work well with lock down either since it's a close range weapon and the lock-down is only usable at long ranges.
As someone who plays both the Prowler and Vanguard alot of the time nower days both the tanks seem to have problems with the AT weapon. Enforcer is weaker then Halberd in terms of DPS, while the Vulcan is poor at range. Basicly the Halberd is the better weapon at the end of the day.
Until the promised rework of TR secondary guns comes into the game, the Halberd is probably the only one that fits your description. I'd like to add that on the Magrider the Saron HRB and the Halberd are side grades. The Saron has a bit higher in-yo-face burst, but has to pick either damage or accuracy at longer ranges (which is to say miss a helluva lot or restrict re-fires to regain accuracy). The Halberd is much more consistent with it's damage at any range, and 1-shots non-flak-5 infantry I believe. Problem with the Vulcan relative to the Saron is that the Vulcan takes the accuracy/damage penalty of the Saron HRB to an extreme. So I'd say go with the Halberd for now. Ps: Halberd has 275 m/s projectiles, Saron has 300 m/s. But while the Saron is higher, the Halberd is the better option for long range fighting. Just. They're still even options overall.
Sure, but why even bring that up? In the ~20% of MBT pulls where you need an AI weapon you're not going to take a predominantly AV weapon. That'd be stupid. Personally I hardly ever use AV secondaries anyway, and this decision isn most justified on the Prowler, since it's the best solo MBT in the game by a strong margin. So unless you've saturated the area with vehicles and need to worry about vehicle "density", you're better off with two separate AP+[something] Prowlers than a single AP+Halberd one. AP+Walker is still my most frequent pull, with AP+Basilisk and AP+AI my next two most common choices. If you run with multiple players, coordinating secondaries allows for even greater potential (without cutting into long-range sniping potential at all since all of you can anchor.) If you run with more than just a few, that's the only time where you start to want to run 2/2 MBTs (though you might also just consider air support at that point.) But in that context you can see how the Marauder is definitely a solid choice, since it just doesn't matter if there are constant nonstop enemies around -- you're only hopping into the thing when there are.
Let me explain something here. This post before me is gold if the stats are correct. I played the 3 faction mostly TR. From my experience i found out that playing as Prowler or a Vanguard as a starter gave me loads of kills while as a Magraider was a lot harder. So i can easily tell by this data that a skilled Magrider driver with a skilled secondary gunner outmatches any other vehicle by far. As i said on my previous post Prowlers and Vanguards can only move forwards backwards while Magrider can move sideways backwards forwards and even up and down if you consider their climbing ability and also can burst away in a second. I personally think that even if you cut their damage by 2 a skilled Magrider will still be able to prevail just because of mobility. But we aren't play a 1v1 game so at this point I have decided to go for the Helbert. thank you all.
The numbers should be correct since they are pulled from the official API. Although it can be debated if KPH and KPU is a valid metric on effectiveness and an aggregated number like the one I present does not tell the whole story. To analyse the effectiveness of different weapons you need to see how they are used. The Prowler is designed to sit far away on a hill and bombard a base with shells. The special ability is lock down and this is the only way you can use that without committing suicide. So the main gun gets more kills because it's designed only to be used in a defensive manner where you have a higher DPS than the others. Both the Magrider and the Vanguard are more close range which mean their secondaries can actually be used. Both the Vulcan and the Marauder are close ranged weapons which are utterly useless when you are camping a hill. The only option is the Halberd because it fits in with the design of the Prowler. It does not have the speed or manoeuvrability of the Magrider or the survivability of the Vanguard to go up close where a Vulcan would be effective. So that's why the Prowler score so low on secondary kills. It is not designed to be used that way. The design does not make much sense. The core design of the Prowler ability and main gun is fundamentally opposite that of the secondary guns. There is no synergy. If you want to draw some kind of conclusion, I guess it is that the Prowler is the best solo farming MBT and the Magrider is the best 2/2 farming MBT.
But that's kinda the problem though, isn't it? That using a second tank > using a gunner. Given that the Saron and Enforcer ML are side grades with the Halberd (at least not flat upgrades), and that one isn't always worth using even (for the prowler), how strong would the secondary have to be to make it worth while over a second tank?
I agree that the Halberd is the best secondary, but some players like the ease of use that a Vulcan or similar faction specific secondary offers. For fun, the occasional Ranger secondary will surprise pilots who think you are harmless to them!
Well I definitely support the idea of MBTs being much more rewarding of 2-man play than 1-man play, but I think most players aren't considering player-efficiency when they choose a vehicle so this sort of change would have to be almost completely developer driven. The average player just doesn't view things from a "we have 12 players, what's the absolute toughest combination of vehicles/classes we can create with that?" point of view (even though if they did, their squads would be substantially more effective.) But if it did manage to happen, it's largely a matter of toning down mainguns while improving secondaries. Another good change would be implementing active abilities for secondary gunners (the energy bar would always reset and charge from 0 when a player entered the turret.) Like a directional shield (since it directly addresses the main shortcoming that one 2/2 tank has relative to two 1/2 tanks.) There are several other possibilities for active abilities for the secondary gunner, and it just generally seems like it both makes the game more fun and improves balance.
Something I didn't get when they did the whole balance pass on the Vulcan is why did they not make the damage a bit lower rather than make the CoF bigger? Having it slowly 'melt' armor with a good cone of fire seems kinda viable, and it could have some effectiveness against infantry given that the other option is a grande launcher that doesn't harm vehicles and just cant reach out. Though the short ranged Vulcan does seem to work fine on the harasser to some degree.
