[Suggestion] Add a Infantry Fighting Vehicle (IFV)

The IFV would be faster than a Sundy, but at a cost of HP, and it should be equipped to take down vehicles at longer ranges (the Sundy cannot be equipped with (AV rockets). Something like a difference between an APC and an IFV, or a cross between a Sundy and a Lightning in this case).

I think this is a nice idea (from both Pouk3D and OP). Something I'd like to see in the game.

Agree with this post.

Dude, they already have such a vehicle... it's called the Valkyrie. Embrace the Valkyrie. (I mean someone has to, right?)

Harassers 2.0 might be in that area, but it's probably closer to a super humvee than to a IFV.

I feel like that is what they intended the Viper Lightning to be..

Wouldn't this completely overlap with the Lightning?

Same HP as a Lightning.

Faster than a Sunderer, which could possibly mean that it could match speeds with or outrun a Lightning.

Can carry two different weapons while the Lightning can only carry one.

Can transport infantry while the Lightning cannot.

Apart from the Skyguard (which maybe an AA-IFV might even eclipse), why would people pull Lightnings?

I would prefer they fix the vehicles we already have before adding anymore. Every vehicle in the game as a primary role of infantry farmer and that needs to change. Each vehicle should have a clearly defined play style and role other than 'farm infantry with OHK or super fast TTK weapons'.

Oh hey, they finally got around to giving it wings.
It's called the "Valkyrie" now though...

This.

Change vehicles to AV use, with few AI exceptions that easily fall prey to the new AV standard if they don't bail at the first sign of trouble.
Only providing AI use weapons for MBT secondary guns, viper lightnings, harasser weapons, and zephyr/duster libs.
(The AI libs are actually acceptable as they are, because they're candy to dalton/shredder libs.)


The tank main cannons should be replaced with AV intended cannon types, all with the splash of current AP rounds:
- AP rounds (left the same as they are now).
- High Velocity rounds (heat round AV damage, so lower than AP, but higher velocity so hitting is easier, this would be the starter cannon so it's more newbie friendly. Additionally, this cannon could aim a good 5% higher to capitalize on it's velocity against the occasional oblivious low flying aircraft).
- Ultra-Lightweight rounds (Faster reload speed, more ammo capacity base, but low AV damage like HE rounds, yet still balanced for AV use. This allows more consistent damage, with less penalty for missed rounds, but more difficulty if your target can escape easily when he starts taking damage).

These rounds would still kill infantry on a direct hit, but wouldn't be easy mode farm machines.
Now the only tank main cannons that can truly farm infantry are lightnings with the Viper rounds.


Now make ESF AI primary weapons (banshee, PPA, and AH) do zero heavy armor damage, and medium light vehicle damage as well as takes up both wing mounts (so no farm nose and AV secondary or afterburner extension so escapes are tougher).
This removes their ability to farm unless forcing area denial on them when you roll out AA armor, both ground based and air based.

Lastly, remove bulldogs from galaxies.
They have zero right to farm infantry with massive shells like that.

----------

There we have it, vehicles that can serve as AI vehicles, yet to farm in armor you better watch your butt for AV armor looking for easy certs when they hear your farm gun firing, and you better have the skills to escape when other vehicles show up.

The Lightning can be used to its fullest potential with just 1 player while an IFV would take more than 1 player to use it to its fullest potential.

That's not terribly reassuring.

Remember the Harasser back when it was released? That totally eclipsed the Lightning as a combat vehicle, even if it technically required two people to operate. There was no reason to go with the Lightning (except for Skyguard) when I could jump in a Harasser, drive it around, and switch to the secondary AV weapon as necessary.

They had to fix the Harasser by heavily reducing its durability, making it into a high-speed raider who couldn't take many hits. This balanced things out by creating distinct roles for both the Harasser and Lightning which didn't overlap. Needing more than one person to operate was not a sufficient divider into making distinct roles.

I'm seeing the same problems here with this proposed IFV. Doesn't matter that it needs more than one person to operate as the Harasser fiasco taught us. You just can't make it so close to the Lightning without raising the question of why one would take a Lightning instead of this IFV in the first place.

I think there is an IFV in the game, it's called a battle Sundy and they are hard as nails to take down if you're short on people.

What kind of weapon does the Harasser has that comes close to what the Lightning has? The Halberd has a much shorter range and greater bullet drop than any cannon the Lightning can equip.

You asked if anyone would use the Lightning as compared to the Harasser. Well, I would, since I don't usually have people riding on my vehicles, so I am contented with driving alone and at the same time not being compromised, plus I like to shoot and drive at the same time. And I'm sure many people pull A2G ESFs rather than a Liberator because of this too.

Funny that you bring that up right now, because there are many threads about the Vulcan-H at the moment, going up against all sorts of things up to and including MBTs. Nothing a Lightning has can compare to the DPS of a Vulcan-H against an MBT. Even the Saron-H can deal respectable damage to an MBT... doing about 546 DPS (not including armor). This is comparable to the Lightning's AP cannon which does 640 DPS to an MBT (not including armor), and is also penalized more for missing.

When the Harasser was originally released it was indeed quite powerful. At release it had 3x the self-repair ability, increased Turbo, and 2-3x the Composite Armor protection. It was monstrous. Even if you hit them all with your Python AP cannon, there was no way a Lightning could win against those. MBTs also had significant difficulty in dealing with Harassers.

As for shooting and moving, in theory that's fine and it works at closer ranges, but in practice because our tanks have WWII levels of cannon stabilizers the best tactic is to come to a partial or full stop. And if you're coming to a stop or slow down while shooting, that's effectively the same thing with seat swapping in a Harasser.

Back when Harassers were first introduced they were so OP that even I got out of my Lightning and was using Harassers instead. Fortunately they were nerfed later, but the idea remains that adding a Harasser-like vehicle can be quite risky.

Practically sounds like a Harasser, but carries one more person and harder to destroy.

All vehicles right now are IFV. We don't need more crutches for those who are bad at FPS games.

He's talking about PS1 Deliverer vehicle. Which was basically a smaller Sunderer, with weaker guns, less armor, more speed, no deploy capability and room for only 5 people.

Why add a subtly different version of the sunderer when there is scope to add more distinctive vehicles?

e.g. artillery, lonestar, deployable support vehicle with unique abilities (force field, long range vehicle radar, regeneration field), etc etc.

SOE would have to make it so people would not say "Well why don't I just pull a viper?" and "Whats the point of pulling a viper?"

Because in some cases you only have half a squad and need something that moves faster than a Sunderer? Cheaper on resources than Sunderer (as in cheap 5 man transport)? Because it's another cert sink for those that don't know what to spend their certs on? Because PS1 had it? Because it would be easy to implement? Variety? Good counter to harassholes? Real content addition? Better than redoing every gun with gold tint and pricing them at 25$?

Just some of the reasons off the top of my head.