Why are all of the MBT AI CQC on a ranged platform

It currently makes 0 sense to me why a tank has to drive within 50m of a target to kill an infantry (Cannister, and PPA mostly). The risk for getting that close to the target isn't nearly worth the reward. Why does a tank have to drive within 50m to kill infantry decently while infantry can destroy tanks 250+ out? (ie, Lancer, ground lock ons, pheonix). Not asking for any nerfs or buffs just wondering.

Because the alternative was being 250m+ out, raining an unceasing stream of accurate death at anyone who dared poke their nose around a corner to take a brave but ultimately futile shot at a tank so distant it didn't even show on the minimap when spotted.

Generally it's for LA C4 and Engie tank mine coverage, as they have to be in relatively close proximity to the tank to do anything to it. That's the thought, anyway....

Because people complain when AI weapons are good.

It's a bloody tank. It was originally designed to break through enemy lines while shrugging off the worst the enemy could throw at it, and protecting the infantry that followed behind and likewise supported said tank.

What are you tankers doing so far behind the infantry line that you can fully grasp the various sizes and shapes of your infantry's posteriors while they do glorious, effective and productive battle with the actual enemy over the actual objective?

It's like a MAX who waits for the Engineers and Medics to rush the point first, then follows. Hell lot of good you're doing.

Well the kobalt is more ranged and pretty accurate past 150m but the empire specific each are now short range.

Because it is probably supposed to be a defensive system.
Protect yourself from dumbfire heavys, c4 runner/fairies and so on while fighting in an environment that is unfavorable for tanks (urban/very hilly/forest/...).

In open field and at longer ranges you can kill infantry just fine using your main gun. Just dont expect to kill anything without good aim.

In their current incarnation, the ES AI are close range point-defense against infantry, while the NS Kobalt is the ranged AI.

That said, the Kobalt doesn't feel good enough for truly long-ranged work (CoF blooms way too fast for even burst fire to be reliable past a certain range), while the ES AI for the most part aren't better than the Kobalt enough (if at all) at close range.

Kobalt acts like a Gauss saw on a mount, it starts out fine but if you dont burst it all goes to hell. the need to just make it have a very small cone of fire, not like it has splash to mess things up at range.

Just usr halberd like most others and uou can kill infantry at range like your main gun.

halberd is the boring min max option.

Empire specific AI gunner weapons are mainly designed for point defense, not for absolute killing potential. People that get close to you make the weapon more effective, having the weapon on your tank 'should' (And I use that term without much certainty) make infantry stay away. When use offensively, you are putting your vehicle at risk more so than the NS option but its more devastating when taking the offensive now I'm just saying these opinions out assuming you have a capable gunner.

The best way to make use of the weapons is to use proximity radar on your vehicle, given that both you and the gunner could identify targets, as well as using thermal optics. Its not really a good option for a 'Jack of all trades' tank, nor good for a 'Anti vehicle' set up. Using it as a backup against infantry while using the main cannon with AP/AV option isn't wise either. I would suggest that the gunner weapon be used on a strict anti-infantry set up.

While I know this post is talking about the recently nerfed PPA (which deserved it, believe me), it could also apply likewise to infantry AV options. As someone who drives a tank every so often, nothing is less fun than getting ganked from far beyond render distances by projectiles you can't even see. Not even infantry have to deal with such an asymmetric threat as ranged infantry AV.

Why is an AP CQC minigun on a 120mm 2 barreled sniper tank?

The world may never know...

Because as shown with the PPA nerf, MBT ES AI isn't intended to be a long range farming tool. You can use your main gun for that kind of range. The secondaries are supposed to be for close range, where the main gun is more limited.

Because your DPS in CQB tank brawling is then off the charts.

AND if you're locked down at range, your gunner should just hop out and use his MANA AV turret.

Better than Halberd anyways.

man a good tanker with a vulcan secondary that knows how to drive is dangerous, that double barreled cannon up close can be a nightmare coupled with the vulcan at the right ranges. to bad most prowler drivers at too chicken **** to get into the battle and apply their DPS.

Step 1: Buy Kobalt
Step 2: Put thermals on it
Step 3: Farm Certs

Probably don't even need the main cannon unless another tank shows up.

For bonus certs, increase the ammo pool. This way you don't need to reload as much.

Not me and my gunner.

To bad he quit playing

We used to get around flanks all the time and just face battle enemies.

You know when Saron gets close and it just HURTS? Yeah, Vulcan can do that too only it's paired with the Prowlers double barrel monstrosity.

Stealth, Racer, and Fire Supp for maximum efficiency. (I just had my 1 build of Lockdown, Side armor, Rival, and HEAT haha... still pwned)

Yes, I agree that bursting is really essential for using the Kobalt, and it annoys me to no end when random pub jump onto my Sunderer and magdump my Kobalt.

What I was saying is that I think the Kobalt could use a small buff on CoF bloom to make bursting more viable (as opposed to single-shots) at longer ranges. I'm generally happy with the initial CoF, and the CoF recovery is really great with this gun.