[Vehicle] Does the Harasser's resistance to AP shells need adjusting?

Here is a playlist containing some good examples of how not to fight vehicles. It also includes some humor. Just some.

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLFxh78egnSZV3C2hUxTSuQidSskZee32j

Harasser main here,

Most of the stuff said here already is pretty spot on. However, to more directly answer OP's question:
Even if the devs 'nerfed' the harasser armor to only withstand 2 AP shots, I think the harasser community would turn to the Composite Armor certification to survive with just enough health to retreat.
But also as others have said, having a top gunner on your tank not only reduces your TTK, but also acts as a strong deterrent against harassers since a solo MBT can easily outplayed by a competent harasser crew.

Also, I find that piloting a harasser is significantly different than a tank. Just like others have said before, you need to compare both vehicles to match your play style.
Harassers are funner in my opinion since you can troll around with it: go off jumps, get into buildings, and even go on vehicular manslaughter sprees!

What's that got to do with anything? Emerald NC.

Everything.

I have found that the Anti-Tank Vehicle is good for hunting tanks.

The Harasser is okay at it but not as fun.

I believe it is too strong for its nanite cost. for 350 nanites it simply shouldn't be that powerful and that fast. When looking at force multipliers, the key point is how easily they generate certs for time spent. Aircraft are a good example as they can really generate a lot of certs because they get to the fight so fast, but planes are for another thread.

The fact is that a harasser is faster than a flash and has the armor of a lighting. Ramming infantry alone is a huge cert generator by a harasser. Plus they can sit at long range and a solo driver can out dps an AV turret - a lighting at 2x nanite the coste can't do that. If they sneak up behind an MBT, they can destroy it in one clip, just like a liberator with a tankbuster.

The only hard counter to a harasser is tank mines. A deterrence (lock-ons or an MBT guarding a sunderer for instance ) is next to worthless BECAUSE IT GENERATES NO CERTS FOR THE PLAYER THAT USES IT - plus the harasser is so fast that it can go fight elsewhere once it identifies a deterrence.

They need lower hp so they are not only a cert generator for the driver and gunner, but also a cert generator for people using a hard counter. A 2/2 MBT needs to be able to laugh at a 2/2 harasser, not be forced to take it more seriously than a lighting tank. Quite frankly, the AV weapon options for a harasser need to be limited more than a lighting. It's quite silly that a lighting is usually out-gunned by a cheap harasser.

Who do I talk to, to get a lobotomy around here?

2HK against Harassers is probably a good thing. OHK is too harsh, but 2HK means that after the first hit the Harasser crew must decide whether they want to stay or leave. That's a real risk-reward scenario.

2HK against Harassers would also severely nerf 1/3 Harassers, because often they can't switch seats and escape quickly enough. Currently a 1/3 Harasser can shoot, take a hit, and run away fast enough before a 3d hit can land.

The Skyguard should also be made into a Harasser killer, as the 40mm Skyguard seems perfect for the role. Fast, rapid-firing allows for engaging moving targets, and 40mm shells ought to go through Harasser armour like tissue paper. This would also give Skyguards an additional role alongside HEAT/AP armour, as the Skyguard could protect against air and light vehicle units (while being countered by HEAT/AP tanks). Maybe a 5HK against a Skyguard cannon.

Really any benefit Harassers get should be counted as "extra"... as Harassers should probably die to just a single burst of LMG fire.



Back in the days of the crazy Vulcan, there really wasn't anything you could do as an AP Lightning against a Vulcan-H, except hop out of the Lightning and hope you could redeploy before the wreckage of the Lightning disappeared. Things are still pretty bad today, with the Gatekeeper-H and Vulcan-H accounting for 3.99% of all Lightning deaths... while all Lightning AP cannons (TR, NC, VS) can only claim 5.07% of Lightning deaths!

In reverse, Lightning AP cannons only can claim 2.14% of Harasser deaths, so things are pretty imbalanced.

Ideally, it should be:
Harasser beats MBT
MBT beats Lightning
Lightning beats Harasser

Or some sort of balanced system like that, where each vehicle has a role.

Haha, break from hornets...good one

I'm not so sure about that. My experiences with the Miller TR and Connery VS aren't really all that different. I suppose it's possible that the Briggs Harassers are god-tier and I simply wouldn't know that... but on three fifths of the servers, my little soloderp tank fends them off fine enough as-is.

Hate to say it but the Vulcan-H is every bit as potent today as it was before, it's just that Harasser-ers discovered the 'fun' to be had with the Gatekeeper-H. Since the GK tweak, it is possible that people will rediscover the Vulcan and the forum will be alive with "Nerf Vulcan" threads again. I fear the days of the crazy Vulcan may be just around the corner again

Harasser have a better skill ceiling than MBTs but at skill equivalent crews (situational wawareness, positioning, aiming) the harasser don't have any chances.
I don't see the problem with actual balance, at least versus MBTs.

It"s an other issue versus lightning and infantires

I'm still new, but I always preferred to pull a Vulcan over a Lolkeeper except in specific situations, and my gunners felt the same.

I knew you'd love that.

Unless it hits the engine block or the chassis, then it would be nothing but a hole. The shell wouldn't hit anything hard enough to fracture, liquefy, or detonate it cap (depended on shell type). This is what they call over penning the target. You see, tank shells aren't really designed to destroy tanks outright, merely kill the squishy bits inside and disable the tank. And what normally kills them is the pressure wave, liquefied armor of the tank itself, or fragments of the shell (or the toxic fumes caused by all that if they don't die instantly). Getting hit while in a tank is probably one of the worst ways to go on a battlefield.

Not really, unless the round passes within a inch or so, the pressure wave dissipates very quickly in such a open environment. That's not to say it wouldn't cause hearing damage and knock you around a bit. But it would be far from lethal. APC and other vehicle crews have survived such rounds passing within a foot, why not in a wrangler as well.

Though Harassers, being fairly compact, don't exactly have a whole lot of space where there wouldn't be much "important". Even a hit to the frame might be enough to compromise the structure such that the next time it pulls a tight turn the thing is wrecked.

And obviously hitting any occupant should be an instant kill.

Additionally there's always the chance of an ammunition cook-off. And considering that they managed to fit 31x 85mm Halberd rockets in it, I can imagine that there's ammunition crammed everywhere in a Harasser.

Try coming up on a Vanguard with a Titan AP, and Enforcer and it knows you're there.

The TTK vs max armor Harasser is quicker than you can unload half a vulcan. I think its fine. Even getting the jump on a MBT is dicey.

GhostAvatar made a good point. Over penetration does do less damage. In Desert Storm there was a case of an Iraqi tank hit with an AP round from an M1A1 Abrams that killed part of the crew, but it pierced without exploding. The leftover crew was able to use the main cannon against the back of a Bradley. Nasty mess that.