Prowler not bad?

[Hito]

Plz dont flame me on this but i was on tr for awhile and now im vs - i only used the prowler and some people keep complaining about it - but i thought it was great because it could hold more then 2 people and use the cannon and gun at same time.
now isent that better if u ask me? having more then one mind in a vehicle? more killz more exp? i just dont think the prowler is a bad tank if you ask me thats all-agreements-flameing-opinions-proceed :huh:

[Lartnev]

If you can get a 12mm gunner yes. Most of the time that isn't the case :(

[Electrofreak]

Yeah gunners for the 12mm are damn hard to come by

[Krinsath]

If the 12mm actually landed half of it's shots on anything smaller than a battle tank, it'd be great! That's a flaw of every dual weapon system, along with the fact that the RoF doesn't increase as a result (still not sure how the hell that works out...the dual guns fire at the same rate TOGETHER as a SINGLE one does...shouldn't there be twice as many bullets used in the same amount of time? :confused: ).

Problem with the Prowler has to do with comparisons.

1) It's a big, giant target with medium armor. It's common competitors are both shorter and harder to hit, and in the case of the Vanguard do more damage per shot...which really sucks when it's easy for them to land DIRECT hits on you.

2) If you're going into a straight armor battle with full crews, the TR can take a full platoon and field 10 tanks. The NC and VS can both take that same platoon and field 15. Want to place bets on who's going to win that fight?

3) Pretend that they don't take full crews, the NC and VS can drop two tanks from their force and get 4 Reavers and completely devastate the Prowlers that have no way to respond. 4 Reavers > 2 tanks with no ability to counter them.

4) The Prowler, despite being the biggest target, cannot outrun anything. If you get badly damaged, you better pray for support because you're screwed otherwise.

Quick and dirty solutions to the 1v1 imbalance with NC (it's a decent enough tank against the Mag): Swap Armor with Vanguard OR swap speed with Vanguard. The Prowler should be superior to that tank in one of those areas.

Solutions to the 150% crew requirement: Dunno, short of allowing the main gunner to control both if there is no 3rd crewman.

[ORANGE]

It took me close to a min to kill a guy in rexo with the 12mm and as for AA those things are crap the guns are nice but you can't go head to head against a vanguard or mag they will blow you away (vang because heavier armor, mag more manuverable) that is unless you have a good driver who knows that you can't stand and slug it out you need to use what little mobility the thing has to move around (most drivers don't know this however).

[oddfish]

hence the reason i still maintain that the damn prowler should be much faster than it is, and a new one-- It should have faster shell velocity because the shell size is smaller, therefore not as much weight, so accuracy would improve and yeah.. yeah..

[Eldanesh]

4) The Prowler, despite being the biggest target, cannot outrun anything. If you get badly damaged, you better pray for support because you're screwed otherwise.

Quick and dirty solutions to the 1v1 imbalance with NC (it's a decent enough tank against the Mag): Swap Armor with Vanguard OR swap speed with Vanguard. The Prowler should be superior to that tank in one of those areas.

Solutions to the 150% crew requirement: Dunno, short of allowing the main gunner to control both if there is no 3rd crewman.

Swap Armor with Vanguard OR swap speed with Vanguard.

Driving a tank that is slow does suck, mainly because you cannot escape to repair and die far more often. I would not say swap it with the vanguard, but buff speed up to the vanguard. As is, a prowler can screw up an vanguard really badly if it closes the distance and can get solid shots with the main gun, I could not imagine trying to kill those things if I had to work through all that extra armor or could not have a chance at disengaging.

Look at max advantages, NC can take more hits, TR gets better DPS (yes, I know the lockdown sucks, but its more the theme I refer to). If the tanks are moving the same, or close to the same speed, the tank fight is even. It already is close to even on Van vs Prowler, as the 10 kph or so does not make as big a difference in that type of fight, unless one was damaged or has the aid of av.

Also magriders should sink on the water after sitting out there for a few minutes, it is a massive pain in the ass, every time if you are within 200m of water they will immediatly run and instantly that 150 becomes a 20 while you become a massive target.

Oh, the 12mm should also be coaxial with the 100mm until a 3rd person jumps in imo, ditto for marauder. There is no reason that one of your advantages should be such a massive liability.

[Krinsath]

Lowering muzzle velocity isn't really justifiable on a weight basis. One could argue that although the 150mm shell is heavier, the NC being the gun nuts they are just packed more propellent than usual in it.

However, I wouldn't argue with the Prowler having a better trajectory on it's guns. Find it annoying that ALL the cannons in this game fire in an arc...did we lose the ability in the future to make tank shells that go straight ahead?

Driving a tank that is slow does suck, mainly because you cannot escape to repair and die far more often. I would not say swap it with the vanguard, but buff speed up to the vanguard. As is, a prowler can screw up an vanguard really badly if it closes the distance and can get solid shots with the main gun, I could not imagine trying to kill those things if I had to work through all that extra armor or could not have a chance at disengaging.

Look at max advantages, NC can take more hits, TR gets better DPS (yes, I know the lockdown sucks, but its more the theme I refer to). If the tanks are moving the same, or close to the same speed, the tank fight is even. It already is close to even on Van vs Prowler, as the 10 kph or so does not make as big a difference in that type of fight, unless one was damaged or has the aid of av.

The problem is that the Vanguard beats the Prowler on BOTH counts. If the Van had heavier armor but a slower speed, it would still even out as the Vanguard scores hits a heck of a lot easier on the Prowler (it's not exactly a small target).

I agree that swapping armor doesn't seem as valid, but leaving it as the loser in both will ensure that tank remains on the sidelines.

[JakeLogan]

I find it ironic that the van has the most armor even though it says on the vehicle description (or at least it used to) that the prowler is the slowest but most heavily armored tank in the game

[Eldanesh]

I find it ironic that the van has the most armor even though it says on the vehicle description (or at least it used to) that the prowler is the slowest but most heavily armored tank in the game

You can either have best armor or best DPS and TTK, pick one. :)

(well... apparently so unless you are a rexo HA noob, but for tanks it works)

[JakeLogan]

You can either have best armor or best DPS and TTK, pick one. :)
Since it's the slowest I pick more armor

[worldvengence]

Well, we would be better off with a 2 man crew and not 3!! that much is for sure

[Cryptica]

I will agree the prowler does suck in reality. In concept its cool. I mean, you can have your chaingun firing at one guy and the cannon at another. That's neat. Unfourtunately, in reality, that bonus is almost 100% defeated by its slow speed, lack of manuverability, and poor armor (relatively speaking). My first idea to improve it would be one of two things. 1) Make it faster than the van. A lot of people have said this, and I think it makes sense. 2) Increase the RoF on both the cannon and the guns. I mean really, the TR are supposedly all about massive RoF, right? Why not make it so the cannon fires like 2 shots per second? That would be neat. It's slightly faster than the Lightning tanks cannon, which fires around 1 to 1.5 per second, if my estimations are right.

[Peacemaker]

Tacticaly the Prowlers can own. One on one they get stomped.

While were on the target what about magrider primary? PUT AN ARC ON THE POS AND INCREASE DAMAGE. Fucking tanks are NOT AA GUNS. They are NOT SNIPERS. Dont give me any energy doesnt drop bull. Look at the flail shell. Its energy and it drops.

[Krinsath]

Tacticaly the Prowlers can own. One on one they get stomped.

While were on the target what about magrider primary? PUT AN ARC ON THE POS AND INCREASE DAMAGE. Fucking tanks are NOT AA GUNS. They are NOT SNIPERS. Dont give me any energy doesnt drop bull. Look at the flail shell. Its energy and it drops.

Actually, energy doesn't drop...it dissipates (sp?)...the Mag's gun is mean, but it really can't take down moving aircraft reliably. If you're standing still in an aircraft near where enemy MBTs are operating...well, you deserve to be shot down. Just like the cloaker who uses surge when a sniper is in the area deserves to get one-shotted.

The Mag does a mediocre job against armor, air and infantry...doesn't do a GREAT job against any of them. That sounds like a rather versatile unit...if only the VS were about flexibility.... :rolleyes:

[Eldanesh]

I will agree the prowler does suck in reality. In concept its cool. I mean, you can have your chaingun firing at one guy and the cannon at another. That's neat. Unfourtunately, in reality, that bonus is almost 100% defeated by its slow speed, lack of manuverability, and poor armor (relatively speaking). My first idea to improve it would be one of two things. 1) Make it faster than the van. A lot of people have said this, and I think it makes sense. 2) Increase the RoF on both the cannon and the guns. I mean really, the TR are supposedly all about massive RoF, right? Why not make it so the cannon fires like 2 shots per second? That would be neat. It's slightly faster than the Lightning tanks cannon, which fires around 1 to 1.5 per second, if my estimations are right.


Again, I think it would be really cool to have van and prowler the SAME speed, just because they are different empires, why does one hafta be faster? The van's heavy armor weighs it down just as much as the prowler's heavier guns.

Why not make it so the cannon fires like 2 shots per second? That would be neat.

Well, for one it already tears up EVERYTHING firing at the speed it does right now, in a straight out firefight, standing still, it will kill a van faster. Also, how does firing 100mm shells faster than a lightning sound balenced? :scared:

That 3rd gunner seat should not be required, but an asset if you can find a gunner, 100mm can fire 12mm if there is no 12mm gunner.

[Incompetent]

I agree with Eldanesh, it's no so much bad as... inefficient. If they matched it's speed with the Vanguard and slaved the twelve to the main gunner when it's unmanned I think the battle tanks would be extremely well balanced.

edit: I would hate for them to take out the twelve gunner completely though. It's a generally helpful thing to have around especially if you put a column commander in there, since then he doesn't have to worry about driving or concentrating on gunning, but can still contribute fire. Not to mention the fact that a column always has space to let a few standed guys in.

[Lartnev]

If they matched it's speed with the Vanguard and slaved the twelve to the main gunner when it's unmanned

That would only work if you made the guns go at half the RoF or something, else you'd never get a 3rd gunner.

The Magrider is the dogs danglies at range. It also makes mince meat out of buggies and lightnings because it can actually hit them, even at medium to long distance. It also puts off reavers and can have a good shot at libs, gals and lodestars. Mag gunners complain that it takes 3 shots to kill infantry. Personally I feel it's a small price to pay.

[Doop]

Pffft. It's not that the Prowler's bad, it's just if it runs into a Mag or Vanguard, it gets served.

[Lartnev]

At close range it'll beat a magrider hands down.

[Doop]

True enough, but when a Magrider gets close range to a Prowler, if the driver knows jackshit about driving, he'll make a run for it at low health. Meh, overall, the Prowler just fucking sucks for a tank. If the Vanguard is supposed to be the strongest, and the Magrider's supposed to be the fastest, then the Prowler should have the most armor or something. And no, the Vanguard has more armor.

[Eldanesh]

Prowler has DPS and TTK, vna has highest samage per shot wiht most armor, prowler has med armor and highest damage output, should be same speed.

[JakeLogan]

One thing I wouldn't mind seeing is dropping the damage output and increasing the rof on the main guns. Besides as in my earlier argument if you go to get a prowler from the vehicle pad and read the paragraph describing it it says "The prowler has the most armor for a main battle tank" if they are gonna leave it like this it should at least be true......

[Krinsath]

*cough*

http://planetside.station.sony.com/howto/vehicles.jsp

The PROWLER is the largest main battle tank. Having the most armor for a tank and a 360-degree capable turret with dual 100mm heavy cannons, the Prowler is certainly able to devastate many targets in short order. The secondary gunner is able to control a dual rotary chaingun, which is a small turret atop the primary turret. Naturally the sheer size, weight and firepower of this tank makes it slower than any of the main battle tanks.

Seems that the Devs need to keep their word and give the Prowler the Vanguard's armor...or at the very least change their own website. :rolleyes:

[JakeLogan]

*cough*

http://planetside.station.sony.com/howto/vehicles.jsp



Seems that the Devs need to keep their word and give the Prowler the Vanguard's armor...or at the very least change their own website. :rolleyes:
pwned :lol: :rofl:

[Eldanesh]

Well, if they give the prowler best armor then mebe van should get back its fastest ttk and dps... :groovy:

I vote change the site.

[worldvengence]

i vote just swich the armor and be done with it, that would fix alot of the problem, cause if ur in a big enough battle, u actually got ppl fighting for Prowler gunner positions

[Kaymon]

Quick and dirty solutions to the 1v1 imbalance with NC (it's a decent enough tank against the Mag):

Whoa, wait a second. A Vanguard vs a Prowler (with only a main gunner) will lose. Sure, the Vanguard has a 150 while the Prowler has a 100, but the Prowlers RoF more than makes up for it. In a "sit there shelling and don't move" slugfest, the Prowler will come out on top.

Trust me, I know this. I've driven a Prowler for months and I keep telling my gunners to simply not stop firing. Considering the Vanguards low profile and 150mm, and the Magriders straight firing and ability to hover over water, I think the MBT's are nicely balanced.

[Eldanesh]

Whoa, wait a second. A Vanguard vs a Prowler (with only a main gunner) will lose. Sure, the Vanguard has a 150 while the Prowler has a 100, but the Prowlers RoF more than makes up for it. In a "sit there shelling and don't move" slugfest, the Prowler will come out on top. Kefka's right. ;) 100 > 150 in just about every situation.

[Krinsath]

Problem is that it's never a stand em up and slug it out fight. ;) That's like saying nerf the mag's anti-air gun because it shoots down stationary aircraft too well.

Every Vanguard driver worth his salt moves, and I don't know what the heck is up with the Prowler's guns, but they have an insanely different feel from the 150 on the Van. The Prowler CAN be an effective tank, but with the right tactics, the Bolt Driver can be an effective CQB weapon.

In combat, the Prowler is outclassed against the Vanguard. In lab tests only is it competitive.

[Eldanesh]

Speed is the best way to fix this imo, making it faster, but still on par with van. Giving it the best armor AND gun is not the right solution. :)

[Kaymon]

So you're saying that my in game experiences in this game are all lab tests? Of course the damn tanks are going to move, but the Prowler is far nicer to you if you miss a shot. The next shell is well on its way before you realize it. (Go back to rate of fire) Yes, both the Vanguard and the Prowler are going to move around, but that only gives them an equal chance to miss. From there it all boils down to the crew skills.

[JakeLogan]

I wish the prowler had a firing arc like the vans. thats part of the problem the firing arc on the prowler is insane. the magrider's gun I under stand it's a rail gun. the vanguard ok nice firing arc. but then the prowler's firing arc is just stupid. is this the future or WW2?

[Kaymon]

is this the future or WW2?

Whenever I hear that I try to remember that the Terran Republic ruled uncontested for over a millenia. Weapons development comes to a standstill when you have nobody to fight.

[JakeLogan]

Whenever I hear that I try to remember that the Terran Republic ruled uncontested for over a millenia. Weapons development comes to a standstill when you have nobody to fight.
WE have tanks today that shoot a rifled round over a mile I think weapons development comes to a stand still it doesn't regress to 60 years before.

EDIT: Also if weapons research came to a standstill? how did the VS and NC get their weapons?

[Krinsath]

Yes, both the Vanguard and the Prowler are going to move around, but that only gives them an equal chance to miss.

Which is EXACTLY where that 33% bigger thing becomes a problem.

Your in-game experiences do mean something, but by your own admission, you skew the results slightly by being a good crew. Who can really say what the comparable quality of the crew facing you was? The ones you beat handily may have had a gunner on a 56k, or someone who paniced...too many factors to really sit down and say "yes the Prowler is fine" or "No, the Prowler is broken". A good Prowler crew will beat a bad, probably even an average Vanguard crew. What about good on good? That's where the measurements need to be taken.

The drop in Terran armor, combined with many comments across several outfits about frustrations with the TR vehicles, means that there needs to be an examination of the tank...in depth and comprehensive and not based on player experiences. That's what is being asked for, suggestions are being offered from their standpoints. The Devs are never under any obligation to buff or nerf anything, but we the players need to bring possible issues to their attention. The Prowler IS a possible issue, as is the Marauder...as are MAXes in general. If you don't mention things, they never get looked at.

[worldvengence]

i still say more armor for the prowler, the speed is not an issue..it is big, and so it is slow, it compensates for it in the RoF...but still i feel the Van and the Prowl should be EQUALLY armored.

[Kaymon]

WE have tanks today that shoot a rifled round over a mile I think weapons development comes to a stand still it doesn't regress to 60 years before.

Ever hear of the cold war? Or Korea, Vietnam, ect? The US has had plenty of reasons to keep up weapons development. And I think the reason we don't have MBT's that can fire a round up to a mile is something we call "balance"

EDIT: Also if weapons research came to a standstill? how did the VS and NC get their weapons?

The Vanu Soverignty weapons were developed by reverse engineering the Vanu artifacts left behind. (Ever notice the whole alien theme they have?) The NC weapon descriptions call them 'modified heavy weaponry'. They developed their own weapons once the war started.

Just because research comes to a standstill doesn't mean it can't start up again.

[Kaymon]

Who can really say what the comparable quality of the crew facing you was? The ones you beat handily may have had a gunner on a 56k, or someone who paniced...too many factors to really sit down and say "yes the Prowler is fine" or "No, the Prowler is broken". A good Prowler crew will beat a bad, probably even an average Vanguard crew. What about good on good? That's where the measurements need to be taken.

I suppose you're right. After all, a few months driving a Prowler means I probably only ran into second rate, panicky, 56k gunners. I never said I didn't lose sometimes.

If you don't mention things, they never get looked at.

And if you're the only one mentioning things, they probably don't.

[Krinsath]

I suppose you're right. After all, a few months driving a Prowler means I probably only ran into second rate, panicky, 56k gunners. I never said I didn't lose sometimes.

Again, you have no knowledge of the actual quality of the crews. You may have been fortunate to assemble an elite crew, and may yourself be an elite driver. You may only engage in Prowler squads/platoons. There are so many random variables that skew results that it is impossible to say what the general trend is. That's why you as an individual are largely discounted, just like my ability to slice through Prowlers like a hot knife through butter in a Vanguard is largely discounted...because 1 proves jack squat. That's why we need to actually examine a wide variety of factors in meaningful amounts to see what the real trend is. I'm willing to admit that I might be wrong, however, you seem completely unwilling to concede that fact and that is why I keep arguing with you about it.

And if you're the only one mentioning things, they probably don't.

I've seen many posts and comments about the general impotence of TR vehicles. They just don't feel it's worth putting up with people who would rather defend the status quo than find out for certain to get things looked at. Conversely, their morale is quite low at this point, and they stop caring about PS and cancel their subs. This in turn hurts PS, especially as they're not around to voice their complaints. PS dies a result. What harm could possibly come from examining performance in a scientific manner? You seem to be acting like it would be the absolute end of the world...

There's also a very high and mighty "holier-than-thou" tone to your posts, which is probably making me more confrontational in my own posts. If you're not trying to do that, then I apologize for anything that may be construed as a personal attack. If that is what you're doing, then you sir, are an ass.

:groovy:

[JakeLogan]

Ever hear of the cold war? Or Korea, Vietnam, ect? The US has had plenty of reasons to keep up weapons development. And I think the reason we don't have MBT's that can fire a round up to a mile is something we call "balance"

While balance is needed and a tank firing round over a mile would be to strong that still doesn't make a good argument for the reason you have to aim 10 feet above a target when it's only 50 feet away. While thats not totally acurate you should understand my argument. The firing arc is to extreme.

[Kaymon]

Hey, if I intended a holier-than-thou attitude, it would be glaring. I can see your points though. All we have are estimated numbers and too many diffrent variables, and for that reason if we keep this up, we'll only be butting heads. I'm going to let my opinion rest on the matter.

[Kaymon]

While balance is needed and a tank firing round over a mile would be to strong that still doesn't make a good argument for the reason you have to aim 10 feet above a target when it's only 50 feet away. While thats not totally acurate you should understand my argument. The firing arc is to extreme.

What I never got is why a smaller shell had more of an arc in the first place. While the devs may be good at making games, their knowledge of the laws of physics seems a bit lackluster.

[Krinsath]

What I never got is why a smaller shell had more of an arc in the first place. While the devs may be good at making games, their knowledge of the laws of physics seems a bit lackluster.

The only explanation I can think of is that the NC packed so much gunpowder (or whatever propellant they use) that it just goes that fast so there's not much arc...the NC are a little big boom happy.

I guess the relative height of the Prowler guns might be another factor...but yeah, really bizarre physics there.

[worldvengence]

Kaymon! Double post, u should be ashamed WTFROFLBAN

"Double Post Nazi"

[Kaymon]

Kaymon! Double post, u should be ashamed WTFROFLBAN

"Double Post Nazi"

I started typing out my first post before JakeLogan posted his. Otherwise I would have rolled them all into one.

[JakeLogan]

Well I just thought of something. don't you think it would be awesome if your going down a bridge and there is a dead vehicle in front of you? If your in a tank ram the bastard and just pushing in front of you or off the side.

[UncleDynamite]

I've browsed through this thread, and I particularly liked how Kaymon mentioned that Prowler gunners should not stop firing the 10mm cannons in battle. This is an excellent point; many gunners have the natural instinct to stop shooting while aiming. But since there is no real downside to maintaining a steady stream of shells while adjusting aim, it's best just to keep the left mouse button pressed in hopes that at least one of your shots land on an enemy.

Whether or not the Prowler is a good tank or not, it is a good spam weapon. When I play with the NC, I find that a Prowler shelling the ground floor of a tower is actually much worse than when a Vanguard is doing the same, because it's very difficult to survive the Prowler's near-continuous flow of shells. The Prowler's ROF is awesome, especially when you consider that the 100mm cannons still do considerable damage. This is not to say that the tank could use a few buffs to bring it more in-line with the other MBTs, but the current version of the Prowler still has a lot going for it.

[Krinsath]

I've browsed through this thread, and I particularly liked how Kaymon mentioned that Prowler gunners should not stop firing the 10mm cannons in battle. This is an excellent point; many gunners have the natural instinct to stop shooting while aiming. But since there is no real downside to maintaining a steady stream of shells while adjusting aim, it's best just to keep the left mouse button pressed in hopes that at least one of your shots land on an enemy.

Whether or not the Prowler is a good tank or not, it is a good spam weapon. When I play with the NC, I find that a Prowler shelling the ground floor of a tower is actually much worse than when a Vanguard is doing the same, because it's very difficult to survive the Prowler's near-continuous flow of shells. The Prowler's ROF is awesome, especially when you consider that the 100mm cannons still do considerable damage. This is not to say that the tank could use a few buffs to bring it more in-line with the other MBTs, but the current version of the Prowler still has a lot going for it.

The Prowler is a functional unit, but is it as competitive as it should be? Yes, it can spam the hell out of everything and pray for something to blow up (and in the case of infantry, it's fairly effective at this) but when you throw in every aspect of PlanetSide, is it competitive or is it a specialized weapon only good in certain circumstances.

Yes, it owns towers, so can any tank expect the Magrider, and even it can make life unpleasant. It can beat the snot out of an infantry formation with that RoF (the 12mms are somewhat useless with over half the shots missing on infantry at range...dual guns = poorly done...again, across the board, not just TR). What happens when a Prowler convoy encounters an equal amount of armor plus infantry and air support? Does it still compete or has it suddenly become a matter of how long before the Prowlers are wiped out. Most armor battles I've seen between roughly equal numbers of tanks and other support have not gone well for the old Prowler.

I think this is due to a variety of factors:

1) The 100mm cannons are dual guns, and hence suffer from the same problem as the 12mms in that if firing at range, it requires a slight adjustment after each shot to hit the same spot.

2) The guns are probably the most elevated in the game, making it hard for anyone who's gunned another vehicle to make a quick transition (and the Prowler doesn't give you much time to learn either)

3) The tank is huge. Big tank = easy target. The Vanguard can land more direct hits on the Prowler simply by virtue of the fact that as long as you're aiming roughly at the middle, you'll probably land that 150 into them. Prowlers cannot claim the same ease of firing.

4) I know the TR are all about RoF and such compensating for power...but does it make sense to anyone to have a tank that cannot be aimed and be effective at the same time? Keep in mind, you need 15 direct hits on a Vanguard to destroy it, that's 30 seconds. They need to hit you 9 times, that's 38 seconds. Miss with more than four of your shots and you almost might as well just bail then and there.

5) The armor is mediocre for a tank of its size. When you're bigger, you get hit more often, but the Prowler for whatever reason doesn't have the armor to really take that much punishment.

6) It's the slowest tank in the game. Being slow in PlanetSide means you get the handling of a stuck pig.

Slow + So-So Armor + Big Target + Hard to Aim Guns = Dead tank. That's what more and more TR have noticed and why the Prowler has become more and more of a rarity on the battlefield. I see jacked Magriders and Vanguards all the time (Nothing funnier than an NC Magrider platoon)...nobody jacks the Prowler (can't remember the last time I saw one that had been jacked...fairly sure it was on Searhus), except to deconstruct it and deny it's use to the enemy. Ever wondered why that is?

Again, the Prowler is a functional weapons system, I'm not saying it is an inherently broken weapon. The best comparison I can think of is the old Lasher (prior to the 5m "oops" situation with the 20 round clip). The weapon could compete in the battlefield, but when its performance was closely examined and compared to the other weapons in its class, they found it really wasn't performing as it should. The Lasher dealt a fairly large amount of damage and could put out a lot of shots...problem was that the weapon was designed to miss sometimes, which skewed the numbers a bit. With the dual guns working the way they do, the Prowler may have been intended to miss, and so the damage on the battlefield may not be what it is in the lab. The other attritbutes of the Prowler (how easy it is to hit, how slow it is, the crew thing that we didn't even get into) seems to add up to enough to warrant a second look at it. Not saying anything NEEDS to be done, but most certainly the possibility that something needs adjustment exists.