@higby, can you post THIS metric?

Cool, another thread discussing that metric chart that shows Magriders obliterated enemy armor without saying HOW.

My guess? Literally EVERY magrider was using a Saron (The AP secondary) the first week. Meanwhile, TR/NC are all running HE/stock with no secondary gunner and getting massacred by said magriders. At least that was my experience.

I Love statistics... dont ask me why. maybe because im german and its somewhere in my blood
so yeah, give us more!

Seriously guys. It's statistics. Do you really think that from 10 000 VS tanks most of them use AP ? No. Most of them are stock or most versatile which means HEAT. It's gaussian function all the way. Don't try to BS us with "we use AP all the time" because I've been defending bases many times and almost always felt Magrider HEAT on my back.

And my experience tells me this is BS. Mags could strafe from incoming shells and rockets. Invulnerability - that was the problem.

Pre-GU, only Prowler secondary worth having was Vulcan which depended on closing distance to the magrider. Basically, how it went was that you took a lot of damage in on the way and then the magrider ran away and you got killed by the infantry. In short, it was not worth having a secondary gunner on a prowler except for a few specific cases. The Saron, on the other hand, was just about the best AT weapon in the game. So yeah, in a way you are right, there usually were secondary gunners on the Saron and there usually were no secondary gunners on Prowlers. Instead, all the smart Prowler drivers were HE-farming infantry since that was the only thing the tank was good for.

... At least that was my experience

I would much rather like to see the overall K/D ratios, with Air, Infantry and tanks all included.

Entirely possible, I'm actually curious as to what the key factor was. All I really have to go on is my anecdotal experience. Which consisted of slaughtering massive numbers of stock/undercrewed enemy tanks. In those situations we could have literally sat still and won.

Which is why all of these people blindly jumping on the charts/data bandwagon are incredibly annoying to me. Data is cool and all, but if you don't interpret it properly it's at best useless and at worst incredibly harmful when you make decisions based off it.

Was the baseline Mag's maneuverability OP? Was it a superior anti-tank secondary skewing the numbers? What would happen if the old prowler suddenly got a Saron equivalent secondary? These are things that need to be known before you go buffing other tanks baseline abilities.

Surely the lyncher is the person doing the lynching?

Also please provide the metrics for how many identified that their tanks were sub-par vs. the Magrider and therefore focused their playing time and speccing towards Anti-Infantry where they could make an impact, thereby in effect forcing them to not use AP weapons.

Dude. He was just correcting you. No need to start bragging about other languages just because something rustled your jimmies. NOTHING in his post was even remotely negative towards you.

With pre-GU2 Enforcer, Mags could easily avoid being hit by it, making AP-tailored VG equally worthless.
You didn't see much ennemy AP-tailored tanks because it was simply not working against mags and your result on the field were better with AI-certed tanks.

Okay, so did the tanks actually need buffs to their baseline stats? Or is that chart the result of having sub-par secondary AT weapons compared to the Saron. Because from what I'm reading so far it appears that it was a bunch of TR/NC feeling like their secondaries weren't worth using versus every VS knowing their secondary rocked. Not hard to imagine how those tank kill numbers got so lopsided if this was the case.

It was a combination of the AT secondaries lacking the range (or the ability to hit reliable at range) combined with the lack of Stabilised AT guns that made a pure AT role outside of brawling range hard or difficult to achieve.

This wouldn't have been a problem if Magriders couldn't strafe and shoot at the same time, strafing on Vanguard/prowler would result in a major loss of accuracy due to aforementioned lack of stabilisation.
It made it a huge problem to hit magriders at range.

And since Vanguards and Prowlers generally had to sit still to shoot at a distance or fought in brawling range whith each other instead, and in those kind of fights infantry with rocket launchers and C4 maker much more of an impact in the fights.
So a lot of Vanguards and especially Prowlers went HE or Heat to deal with them as well.

From the looks of it, prowlers/vanguards won't receive suspension improvements. I inferred from his tweet (and haven't been wrong so far) that the improved magrider suspension is balancing the lower turret position. Since the other two MBTs don't have a badly positioned main turret, they will probably won't receive any suspension improvements. SOE can always change their minds of course and call it "bug fix" at a later point.

This is not a whine thread. There is not a hint of complaint in the initial post... Just a request for data. You're an idiot.

It is a "Nobody" is asking about it.

Why would it matter how many of each type was pulled? I pull my AP Prowler for up to an hour at a time. I'm not pulling it 3x an hour, which makes my metric on the AP Prowler pull stat significantly lower, despite the fact that my AP Prowler output is perhaps 5x that of a stock newbie Prowler.

His entire post (which was incorrect--a lyncher is someone who lynches) was demeaning and negative. He's attempting to be the grammar police and brought nothing positive to the thread. But while we're at it, can someone please follow me and grammar police my Arabic grammar? I'm having troubles with it.

On-topic: I'm against posting all of the advanced metrics SOE has. If they gave access to their stats, people would just min/max and it would exacerbate whatever imbalances are in the game. Being able to play Spreadsheetside 2 instead of Planetside 2 also rewards the statistics nerds over of those who explore the game mechanics by playing the game.

HEAT is better than HE for infantry slaughter if you have any ability to aim what-so-ever. You can blow them apart from further back since it has higher velocity and less drop. And reloads faster so you aren't caught with your pants down.

HE is for people that can't aim.

This tank vs. tank debate is meaningless anyway. Tanks get destroyed by infantry WAY MORE OFTEN than by other tanks.