I stumbled across a small player made base the other night. I was in a cloaker sundy with no armour but the anti-personnel turret on the base chewed up my sundy in no time. I mean seriously quickly for a weapon that is designed to kill infantry, something like 10 seconds. My squad mate came back with a prowler and it very nearly destroyed that too, took it to about 10% health before we destroyed the turret. Surely an AP weapon shouldn't be so strong against armoured vehicles. And yes, I know they should be taken out at range but they still shouldn't chew up armour like that.
without the ability to damage vehicles with the anti-infantry turret it would become effectively useless outside A.I control. an AV turret under operator control is way better at both AI and AV then an anti-infantry turret that would only be really useful under A.I control that can't damage vehicles or an A.I turret that is operated by a player to kill infantry. cloak sundies are best used for concealment against air attacks as the bubble is really easy to see on the ground in obvious deployment spots, obscure your sundie behind some objects between you and the base even if they don't cover the entire cloak bubble.
I thought the Xiphos turret was a multi barrelled Basilisk tbh - useful against both infnatry and vehicles. But that was just an assumption I made after trying one and finding it could hurt both.
Confusing title, AP is used here for Armor Piercing, not Anti-Personel. Xiphos turrets hace an awuful CoF when player-controlled, keep enough distance and it won't hurt much
They are classified as "Heavy Machineguns", meaning that they do 25% damage to Lightnings and 34% damage to MBTs. Their damage profile is lower than a Basilisk (200 versus 250 max damage) and has a shorter range. However the Xiphos makes this up by having a significantly higher RoF (9 versus 6.7 RPS), giving it a ~50% increase in DPS over the Basilisk. Plus the Xiphos doesn't have to reload. It would probably make more sense to make the Xiphos into a Kobalt-esque weapon, with an even higher RoF but the inability to damage heavy vehicles.
AA turrets are for aircraft. The laughably low damage and large CoF makes them poor at engaging vehicles or infantry. AV turrets are for ground vehicles. The low rate of fire makes them poor at engaging aircraft or infantry. AI turrets are for infantry. Yet they have a significant DPS against vehicles and the CoF can't be too large or else they wouldn't be able to engage infantry. Not all base defences are equal, and no base defence should be able to engage a different type of target than they were designated for. Asking for the AI turret to be in-line with the AA and AV turret makes plenty of sense. What doesn't make sense is that the AI turret also doubles as AV.
If you want to go that route, we can argue it doesn't make sense for AP rounds from your lightning to OHK infantry. Cuz nanites and all.
Confusing maybe for you. I'm talking about what Planetside 2 refers to them as, not what real life or other games refer to them as, seeing as it's a Planetside 2 forum and all. I know tanks have AP (armour-piercing) but in this instance they're called anti-personnel turrets, hence they're AP turrets. Blame any confusion on the game developers.
Ya, I don't feel for you. That turret loses any relevant accuracy outside of 100m and the prowler can be taken to 500m+ and destroy turrets just fine.
Yeah, well I did say I stumbled across it. It was well hidden behind a hill and before I could do anything my sundy was toast. As for the Prowler, it wasn't mine. And I'm always saying to him 'you know we outrange them don't you?' but he doesn't listen.
The construction turrets pretty much mimic static base turrets. Including the elusive AI turret which also shreds vehicles.. but there's like 3 bases in the game where they exist.. I think. If they're still there.
Nanites is never an acceptable answer. And the slow rate of fire of AP rounds make them highly ineffective against infantry threats... it's usually better to get out of your tank and use your carbine to swat a LA than to try and AP him out of the sky.
Afraid I am going to be with the majority of what has already been posted. OP got caught in the wrong place with the wrong gear initially. And his squad mate should listen to his suggestion of utilizing the maximum effective range available. As someone who has been absolutely smitten by the construction system and ANTs, a fully certed and well crewed Prowler at range using cover is one thing that I am always on the watch for. At first I thought this would be a thread about how automated AI turrets mow infantry like an overgrown backyard. As to the original question of them being overpowered versus vehicles, especially armor... I think they are "ok" where they are now. Up close, say 75 meters or so they can be a problem for vehicles. But beyond that the cone of fire really opens up. And their velocity is kind of slow for tracking anything moving at a decent clip and juking like an epileptic rabbit with the hiccups. Lastly, they are the only turret that comes "standard" with the basic construction package. As such I think there was consideration to making them a general purpose weapon with emphasis on AI work.
