Comparing Harrasser to MBT

The Harasser is too tanky to be that fast and agile.
It can easily dodge incoming damage from MBT's and can even survive more hits then the weakest part of heavy armour plating.
Another thing that a Harasser can do and an MBT can't is choose the fights. A Harasser can get in and out of fights relatively easily compared to an MBT. It can run when it's too dangerous and it can easily flank and retreat.
An MBT doesn't have that ability due to it's limited maneuverability and relatively low speed.

So on one hand you have a very fast and nimble car with glass windows that can absorb more rounds then heavy armor plating that can pick and choose it's fights and targets. And on the other hand you have a tank that is slow, bulky with heavy armor plating that is weaker then glass windows on a car, but can't be damaged with rifle bullets.

Are there any stats to look at now? It would be interesting to see how these vehicles are comparing against each other.

I think harassers are a bit cheesy. Fun to use though. You forgot to add that you can't expect a lock-on or AV turret to hit a harasser either. THAT is a big buff over tanks that are dealing with all that plus harassers.

what if lock-on times were specific to each vehicle?

They are, and you lock faster on heavy armour then on the harasser. same with esf's vs galaxies

they implemented that eh? well in my opinion then it should be the other way around (for balance not realism)

Each level of composite armor should reduce the top speed and acceleration of the harasser a litte bit and make it more sluggish.

Problem solved.

There is no doubt that harassers are unbalanced. I do not mind the speed as much as the armor. There is no way an armored car should be able to withstand tank shells. When I am in a Lightning the only thing I can do is stay with a group and hope they protect me. The Lightning cannot outrun a Harasser, is not exactly designed to engage fast-moving targets, and has weak points. TR Harassers are the worst, since their specific weapons are ridiculously powerful against both armor and infantry. Even bailing out does not work, since I either get shredded by a Vulcan or get blasted by a skilled Halberd gunner.

Knowing what to balance is key. Flashes need to be faster than the Harasser, thus giving them a niche as light cavalry. Light tanks should be more durable than heavy cavalry. Tanks need an overall buff, but have a dedicated driver and gunner. Harassers themselves need less hitpoints and reduced armor, and should be more vulnerable to high-damage munitions, and certain weapons like the Vulcan and Marauder need to be better specialized to be good against either infantry or armored vehicles.

Tell me, why do you consider a harasser driver 'must be' insanely skilled? You do realise PS2 is a game and no driving test or qualification steps are required to roll a harasser. This is your perception only, why create barriers where there are none. The more experience you gain with a particular infantry class or vehicle the more proficient you get (in theory)...is harasser now considered some new 'advanced' class locked to noobs...I hope not.

this isn't his opinion, rather what is quoted often in defence of the hsr's power, in reality as you are focused on driving it arguably takes less skill to focus on one task instead of two or more.

It's not just lock-on time. The rocket misses due to the rapid movement of the harasser. At least with NC lock-ons. I lock on, fire, and the most I can expect is that it causes the harasser to move. Even when they are heading straight away. Wouldn't matter how quick the lock-on unless it was so quick a parked harasser can't react. They are also immune from LA unless you are lucky or the harasser is lazy. MBT's just don't have that kind of immunity.

just spit balling

Just based on recent experience in-game...

My sunderer with full blockade armor gets taken out by a harasser with vulcan ridiculously fast. The vulcan literally just chews right through the blockade armor faster than a tank does in terms of TTK. Try it out, watch the speed at which the armored sundy's health goes down... it doesn't seem quite right to me.

Two AP shells from my vanguard to the rear of a harasser didn't kill it, it just happily drove away, repaired, came back. I honestly thought AP shells would be more effective against it.

There's a lot to like about the harasser but at the moment, it does seem to be a slightly too efficient killing machine against heavier targets.

What really makes the Harasser so annoying is that you can't even hit it with launchers (even the freaking striker!) unless the driver is really bad.

I usually use my c4 loadout when I'm in my tank now. Then if i'm lucky I can get one close enough to take the harasser down before I die. It has only worked 3 times out of about the last 50 or so but its always awesome when it does.

Mag have even a harder time because our main weapon speed is so dang slow it really hard to hit the dang thing.

[/quote]

All true, and I assumed included in the point on availability that I was making. That's part of the reason why a Harasser shouldn't be equal to or more powerful than an MBT (no matter what anybody says when they get worked up on the forums, a 2/3 Harasser is not the combat equal to a 2/2 MBT so long as the driver and gunner on the MBT have even a rudimentary ability to lead a moving target and they're using appropriate HEAT or AV weaponry on both sides. The MBT does have a significant edge in every scenario except getting snuck up on at close range by something like a Vulcan, in which case the guy might as well have been on a Flash and hopped out and C4-d you.).

However, keep in mind that tank terminals are very common. They're at every major facility, most major facility outposts, all towers, and some small facilities on top of that. If they're not at the base you're at right now, they're less than a minute's drive away. On every continent but Esamir, you have a Tech Plant or you're locked in your WG (in which case it's less than a minute's drive to just pull a MBT at the WG anyway). Yes, it's advantage Harasser there in terms of availability, but not a huge advantage.

If they made tanks available at fewer terminals, that would justify upping their power relative to the Harasser. Personally, I would love it if MBTs were less spammable but more powerful, but that's a separate discussion from "Harasser is OP."

Lastly, a point on the resources. If you're driving an MBT, ideally you survive for more than 5 minutes. I know, sometimes you get outmatched, but at least in my experience the majority of tank pulls by competent tank drivers last more than 5 minutes. In that time, you should get those 150 resources back. If you live longer, you get more. Resources are a stream rather than a static amount.

Also, if you pull an MBT and are unlucky enough to get blown up immediately, you still have enough (300) to pull a Harasser after that--just like the guy who chose to pull the Harasser.

Yes, the Harasser obviously has the edge in resources. But it's not huge either. Both of those advantages are partially offset by the MBTs ability to function at approximately half-strength at 1/2, rather than the Harasser being an XP pinata at 1/3. So, yes, slight advantage to the Harasser in opportunity cost and availability, which means an MBT should have a corresponding slight advantage in combat value (which it does).

The best you can do is look at MBT secondaries versus Harasser secondaries of the same type. But even that won't yield good results due to the MBT's main gun taking kills away from the secondary.

Taking a 1 minute drive means the MBT costs at least 550 resource units- 100 for the Flash (cheapest vehicle), 450 for the tank itself.

I personally find Harassers harder to hit than ESF's as they turn and accelerate much more rapidly than planes, a rudimentary ability to lead shots allows to be accurate with a Basilisk (which in fact is the best way to drive a buggy away).

They're also like 1/4 the size of fighters or tanks and hug the ground good enough to have every tree, rock, container break line of sight while planes must be above all those, risking the single (fighters) or double (gunships) hit that brings them down. They don't need to be heading towards me to shoot me like fighters do (and very often I score kills when they fire the first couple rockets).

I also have yet to see an airplane that goes hull down and fires using its hitbox-less remote weapon system. Sure a tank can use cover as well, but it must be about 2.5 m tall, so all those objects just high enough to give a person on foot protection are no good for a tank.

Then there's repairing on the move with a triage medic behind the wheel- one repairs the vehicle, the other heals the repairman and it becomes perpetuous.

If the buggy happens to lose the engagement, it can drive off at speeds only airplanes can reach, while gaining the HP to resist that lucky long range shot should it hit, another thing impossible for planes.

And finally- the Harasser can shoot its main weapon on the move, something a tank cannot do except on flat terrain.

Reducing combat to DPS and HP only works if a stationary buggy meets a stationary tank on a frozen Esamir river.

Flying gunships and ground attack fighters are less of a threat to tanks than light transports, and tanks are much more efficient at killing planes than buggies. This breaks the suspension of disbelief, and with that, the fun.

Problem(s) with the Harrasser-

It requires less skill to use properly and instead depends on more on 'team work'.

Because of the developers (and a fair part of the community) views and value of 'team work', the effective strength of the thing exponentially larger compared to other items in the game. So even though it may take a marginally larger amount of skill to properly use an MBT, because it is focused on individual skill rather then absolute teamwork, you are not allowed the degree of power the harrasser is.

What compounds this issue is the Synergy created by having a 'Driver/Gunner' relationship dynamic used by the harrasser. Unlike a 2/2 MBT, the 'Primary Gunner' of the tank is still the driver... the 'Petty gunner' on the other hand is usually just along for the ride most of the time, there to cover you a little bit or to (more commonly) vulture off what the primary gunner is attacking.

That Gals should use the extra 7 passengers as ammo because they are just dead weight?