[Vehicle] Prowler is the weakest tank

67% from the front, not 85%. That is included in the second part.

My mistake, So 3 prowlers instead of 6

1. If the Prowlers I was shooting at were at C point then the farthest up the hill would be between 200 and 250m.
2. I would have to turn my rear armor partially towards the Bastion for no real reason at all and expose myself just to be able to turn my front/side armor towards you and still be able to shoot the Prowlers.
3. I was killed once by your Decimator and it was on the crossroads towards Bastion while facing the TR occupied Airdock where the Prowlers were, not when facing Prowlers at the Bastion gate.

Your team did have 65% pop at one of the two big vehicular pushes. But despite that overpop we managed to hold you off and eventually destroy you with primarily Lightnings.
The speed difference is between 5 and 8 km/h. On a maximum speed of +/-61 (Vanguard Rival) and 72km/h (Vanguard racer).
You think the Vanguard is just as maneuverable as the Prowler? Seriously?
You would engage your Vulcan gunner at less than 10m because it lacks alpha damage in close range...? You were either very tired or drunk when you wrote that I hope? CQC is the entire point of the Vulcan! And what is "support distance"? For your information the Vulcan has full damage up to 15m not 10m (weird every other distance you overestimated because it would have been in your favor to have been able to do that) and loses almost 1/3rd the damage at 60m. And while people complain about the Gatekeeper aim the COF of the Gatekeeper even for it's last shot is 0,55, while the minimum starting cone of the Vulcan is already 0,9.
You proclaim that if you could kill a Vanguard with a Prowler you can most definitely do it in a Halberd Harasser? This is getting weird, next you are telling me Magriders can dig into the ground and pop up anywhere they want.
The "clear win condition" is for a moron that tries to fight directly with a Vanguard without trying to dodge, move, use cover or anything. It's like saying the Lightning is weak because it loses against every single MBT in the game even solo. Yet when you look at the stats the Lightning keeps up with all of them, because it's not about a dumb slugfest.
It's about speed, maneuverability, DPS, ease of use, acceleration, muzzle velocity, abilities, stability, hitbox, damage resistances in your average battle, engine power when going uphill etc.
You actually do name things like speed and maneuverability, but then when it comes down to it you immediately go "yargh let's just calculate DPS and avoid touching everything else!".
Fights are not about a static slugmatch between two 100% accuracy vehicles. Fights are dynamic.

the vulcan lacks in alpha in close range up to 10 meters(15 is max but i highly doubt i should get further as it would just be a waste and i wont be able to get to the vanguards back reliably, so if you go for 15m then you're going to die either way 10/10 times
starting the vulcan at the front and moving to the back(mostly at the back) the vulcan shines the most

you cant beat a vanguard by being to his side/front, you will die in close range

while id like the gatekeeper to be useful at any range, its useless, face it
low damage, low potential, no situation in which id take it as it just cannot take out a vanguard 1 on 1
yes its better than the vulcan at range, but at the range at which im actually at danger and cant get into cover, its useless
so no, i wont take it in any situation as survival is crucial

what i meant with the halberd is this:
if i want to use long range sniping id rathar use the halberd on the harraser as its less dangerous, if i want to snipe at long range i can use the ap only instead of the vulcan, as the vulcan wont be much of a use and will only waste ammo(important if you run lv5 ransack)
the gunner is for the worst case scenario at which we cant escape and cant be of use on the long range(most of the map area, unless its esamir)

a clear win condition is a win only situation, for example a smoking vanguard might still win in a slugfest, unlike a smoking prowler which is ded meat if he even tries to peak into the fight
this can be achieved by the prolwer if you can get into the others back or side, or just plainly ram him then start shooting right before you hit, as he will loose aim, health and might climb on you, which is a win condition(ram with 45 degrees to the vangards front/side, doesnt work on the back)
or just using a repair sundy to out dps him in the longer run
these are all win conditions which can be achieved by both sides
but the vanguard has the easier option, which takes no risk in a 1 v 1 fight
if you honestly fighting a prowler at long range and cant closer, just stay there
its the first to get closer that will die, and no the prowler doesnt have the advantage here, he is still lacking dps by 4 3 sec(remember the vanguard has a 8 sec ttk, the prowler closer to 13.5 sec so even peak a boom is bad in this condition)
even this situation benifits the vanguard if his aim isnt bad

and yes, it is a dps only on most fights as you cannot run away from a fight that easily unless you have a lot of friendlies
and even then you dont have the advantage as the prowler, you are at a worse situation than the vanguard, but on the better side of things

remember the community crash?, guess which tank battalion won, and by pure dps
you cant rely on cover as the server side wont help you dodge any bullets as you wont even know when he shot untill you see the tracer and get hit behind the rock(fraction of a second)so yes, it is about pure dps and survival
give us 300% faster reload speed for 8 sec, and see how suddenly it turns unfair that we can actually out dps you and how your whole dps is situational only a bs idea
ah and outwaiting the shield to end idea - just outwait the whole 200% reload speed idea

I find it amusing when complaints are made that a prowler can't beat a vanguard in close, yet that same prowler with barrage can obliterate a magrider in close and still have half health remaining (without landing rear shots and both sides hitting all shots).

It takes 1 Prowler driver who knows what he's doing to destroy a Vanguard
It takes 1 Magrider driver who knows what he's doing to destroy a Vanguard


If a Prowler rushes a Vanguard and dies then that's his fault, same if a Magrider doesn't strafe whilst firing at a Vanguard

So your complaint can be boiled down to "in a situation that shouldn't happen anyway unless you are quite literally standing still in close range doing nothing but throw shells at each other without consideration for cover or anything else, then the Vanguard is guaranteed to win".

Why don't you grow a pair and use the Prowler as the death-dealing easy to use high powered vehicle that it is?

Everyone knows, the absolute worst tank is the Vanguard. It is so unbelievably bad, that even against a simple unarmed flash it absolutely stands no chance at all. The Magrider on the other side is an absolute beast. It is so unbelievably awesome, that with even only ONE 1/2 manned Magrider you can take out a whole NC Vanguard Platoon (Yes, not only a Squad, but a whole Platoon) with only one Magrider. The Prowler is somewhere in between there. Not absolutely useless, but also not that brutally awesome either.

Give that vanguard a shield, which lasts at least 10 minutes, with a cooldown of 1 second, to stand a little chance against the other tanks.

And naturally the people who can't come up with any reasonable argument immediately stretch to absurdism.

Sorry bud but I have to call you on your hypocrisy in this instance.

You argue that the Mjolnir is worse than the Vulcan due to accuracy and ease of windowlicking use for the Vulc - even though the Mjolnir has better DPS on a spreadsheet and at the SAME Intended Max Damage Range (< 15M for Vulcan) the Mjolnir is still 100% hit rate.

Then you counter argue that the Gatekeeper is as good as the Enforcer in exactly the opposite fashion, although the Enforcer is actually accurate and the Gatekeeper performs FAR WORSE at its intended range - because it has the Mjolnir forced-inaccuracy issue.

So which one is it bro? I Smell that NC perma-bias creeping in, lol

Prowlers are SOOO fast to boot lol. I'm gaining some good perspectives in my time away from TR.

I walk in during winter and blow on my hands to warm them again. A bit later I've made some warm soup and blow on it to cool it off.

Savadrin: what is this hypocracy!

I've looked at the claims being made, looked at how the weapon performed in game and made a conclusion on how the weapon behaves, IE not the way portrayed by the other person. If you have a problem with that come up with a better, non-subjectivr conclusion.

This analogy isn't even close to what you are saying.

Your stated claims for why the Mjolnir is worse than the Vulcan are cool when it's NC who needs a buff. Claim: Mjolnir is inaccurate due to RNG grenade spew, max DPS numbers are irrelevant.

You say Gatekeeper is on par with Enforcer. Claim: Forced RNG grenade spew is irrelevant, look at max DPS numbers.

Sorry bro, you can't double-talk me like I'm your little brother.

Ok why dont we do it like this: you come up with a viable reason why the Vulcan is used more and performs better than the Mjolnir even though according to you they would have the same capabilities in CQC.

You can also try to explain how the Gatekeeper gets relatively close performance compared to the Enforcer even though its "oh so inaccurate".

Because the fact is that their perfomance shows the grievances with these weapons are either wrong or the weapon has some advantages you arent mentioning to make the weapon look worse than it is.

I'm not here to get into that debate with you, I'm just pointing out your flawed logic when it comes to measuring different factions. And your NC Bias.

100% agree with you on the prowler ESF thing. Between that, the Striker, and lock down Burster, TR doesn't have any room to complain about inadequate AA.

But I still don't buy the argument that 2 shots is somehow better than 1. If you aim between shots, the prowler matches the other tanks' dps, but now you have to hit a Harasser 6 times instead of 3. That's especially a pain when you're waiting for yourself and your target to stabilize a bit. I may be entirely wrong and just need more practice, but for the masses I still think the Vanguard takes the cake.

If first misses, deals half of total.
If both land, deal the most damage.
So two chances, to deal any damage.

If 1 shot, full damage is front-loaded, No quick follow-up so it's all or nothing.

Bit of a double-edged sword, but it's handy, let alone for range, as per the others; The first shot can be used to correct the 2nd shot, allowing the next set to more likely land for the higher total output.

This means, a bit of a bad shot, has 2 chances to at least land some damage, and if they miss the first, a follow-up.
Akin to a 2-shot Bolt-action.
Vanguard, has to land the single shot (less than two prowler rounds landed), and the Shield while brutal in single-combat, leaves the vehicle incredibly shifted due to the Power of the Shield (for all of 6 seconds).
The ability usage on it, since the tank is based around the shield, for novices is easily wasted, leaving it crippled.
So, Novice users have 1 shot to land with the longest reload, while reactionary, the ability is critical to Vanguard survival; But timing is kinda important.

Tons of AA on TR, indeed.

Since it can be proven that the NC is getting shafted there is no bias. Also I tend to be on the side of fun. That is why even though the Vanguard shield is obviously its only saving grace I've repeatedly come up with idea's to either nerf or remove the shield and replace it with other things. My latest idea included changing the shield from an ability to an auto-granted 1000 health shield that replaces the current 1000 extra health the Vanguard has.

I'm also not opposed to buffing certain weapons. For example I already pointed out that while the Gatekeeper is close in AV abilities to the Enforcer its AI capabilities are far under par. At minimum a full magazine should kill an infantry player and the Gatekeeper is an AV weapon that should be elegible for dealing increased headshot damage. Since the Gatekeeper is still a bit behind the Enforcer and it isnt the continuous high accuracy damage monster it used to be it would be a far better candidate for the low-level laser guidance that the Siegebreaker has on the PTS so that it gains more accuracy.

But ofcourse, thats just my NC bias speaking...

Then why don't you simply play vanguards and prove it to all of us then?

I don't understand nerf or "it's ok" mentality. Like, if you just play the other factions new toys, just to confirm it helps either prove your argument or it helps disprove you never had an argument in the first place, and yet I keep seeing people ask for nerfs and buffs without any sort of hold of proof. The "magriders weak" thread had more ground due to conceptual applications of mobility, but prowlers? They have easily 20-40% more dps than all the other tanks and have the highest topspeed, how is that bad?

Top guns (AV and VKPU) in general for MBTs are quite uninteresting since there aren't many outliers with the exception of VS performing slightly better than the other factions + having a good deal more uniques despite less MBTs in total.

Though it should be said a single big shot is strong for peek-a-boo fights and versus harassers a big hit is often what you want. The VKPU of the Prowler and Vanguard AP is, after all, often very similar. The VKPU of the Magrider AP is clearly performing better than both other than the Prowler/Vanguard performance spiking at times. Won't really to go deeper into my theories why since I think we exhausted that pretty thoroughly in the magrider thread. Though it would be absolutely amazing if the devs could actually shed some light in this by sharing some player behaviour data like how often/long top gunners stick around, etc etc. Not holding breath though.