So is the Prowler going to suck like it did in PS1?

[Roradan]

yes but when you were with in a armor group with more than a couple tanks you a three man crew could focus more on other targets will any air targets were driven off by the third gun'er. the other two and to switch off there main target or move away if attacked my air. but of course bfr's killed the game in my eye's. so after they came out tanks were pretty much just siting targets for them.

[noxious]

The Prowler was an ownage mobile. The extra gun wasn't needed to pump out awesome DPS, but it was a great asset whenever you had an extra person that just wanted to hop in (which was often).

I still preferred driving a Magrider for its mobility, but I never passed up an opportunity to hack a Prowler since the extra DPS was fantastic.

[EVILPIG]

Sorry Malorn, you just lost a lot of credibility. The Prowler's main gun's DPS was greater than the Vanguard. The 3rd gunner just made it more effective and could simultaneously ward off air.

[Malorn]

You can spare the cred garbage, I really don't care what you think of me. The prowler wasn't up to snuff to the Vannie and Mag. In fact the current state of the prowler was way better than the prowler was while Planetside was in its prime. For a long time it was a comedy kill and a joke. Now it's passable if you swallow it with a vicodin and a shot of whiskey.

Mags and vannies are still the superior tanks. Asking if they're going to give the prowler some love and redesign so it is a true equal is not unreasonable.

[ringring]

As a long time prowler driver and gunner ... and a part time magrider d+g. The Magrider is best.
The prowler is second best
The Vannie is worst....

Onto ps2 ..... I hated the lightning and to me the new tanks (magrider excepted) have the same problem. Extra speed means not a lot, less armour means a great deal.

Tanks will be mostly stationary when firing and when moving to escape not firing .... sounds ... err crap.

[Blitzkri]

Prowler is a good tank. it can take 3 players, its effectiveness in transport and CE disruption is awesome. The cannon actually shoots the ground next to it, unlike the magrider and vanguard.

Because of the extra man on the top gun it can act as a troop transport. 2 FUll prowls can have 2 extra strikers and jammers.

Dont forget the high platform that the cannons stand off. Its great for hull down tactics. http://www.google.ca/search?q=hull+d...w=1920&bih=979
These are some great tactics that the Prowler can use. Check out the first image, the prowler can fire from all positions in third person and stil be effective if he can aim properly.

[Aurmanite]

Originally Posted by Malorn

You can spare the cred garbage, I really don't care what you think of me. The prowler wasn't up to snuff to the Vannie and Mag. In fact the current state of the prowler was way better than the prowler was while Planetside was in its prime. For a long time it was a comedy kill and a joke. Now it's passable if you swallow it with a vicodin and a shot of whiskey.

Mags and vannies are still the superior tanks. Asking if they're going to give the prowler some love and redesign so it is a true equal is not unreasonable.

Being a little sensitive aren't we?

Even though the other two tanks functioned a little better, the Prowler was never a joke. The only upgrade the tank saw was the 15mm replacing the 12mm. From the first day the tank was badss, your personal (and seemingly uninformed) opinion of it aside.

[Monkey]

It was a good tank I felt. It just looked god awful.

[Figment]

I protest against the insinuation the Prowler was a bad tank.

Of all tanks, it was the hardest to take out with a Thunderer, just as an example. And no, it didn't need anyone on the 15mm. Those are better spend as Skyguard crew.

[MGP]

I don't understand how can someone compare damage+armor vs maneuverability vs speed. Speed is imo worst "combat bonus" imaginable. What good does "high speed" do? It only helps if you plan to run away a lot. Amirite?

[BuzzCutPsycho]

Originally Posted by EVILPIG

Sorry Malorn, you just lost a lot of credibility.

Unlike the majority of people here he actually has credibility to lose and despite what you have said he has lost none because everything he is saying is 100% correct.

The Prowler was the worst tank out of the three despite having the best (theoretical) TTK in the game against other MBTs. The high TTK came at the cost of speed, maneuverability, profile an survivability. Is that worth it for a tank in the PlanetSide 1 environment? Absolutely not. The Prowler needed to close in to make the best of it's main gun's ROF and to capitalize on the (upgraded) 15MM gun. Know what makes closing in a problem? Being the slowest and least maneuverable tank with the largest profile in the game.

All I see in this thread are romanticized eWar stories from people who fail to grasp the bigger picture on why the Prowler was the least effective of the three MBTs in the game. Your personal record of going 22-0 while camping a tower with the Prowler's main gun are irrelevant to the fact that it was the worst of the tree tanks. Your faulty and non-applicable "real world" strategies of going "hull down" in PlanetSide are ridiculous at best because in PS1 being immobile behind the few objects in the world which can properly cover the massive girth on that piece of shit is in no way an advantage.

Make no mistake that if you did some how manage to get that fat, slow, lumbering, and poorly armored "tank" into brawling range you would out DPS your opponent's tank but by the time you do get there odds are you're so badly damaged that they can still go toe-to-toe with their slower firing weapons.

I protest against the insinuation the Prowler was a bad tank.

Of all tanks, it was the hardest to take out with a Thunderer, just as an example. And no, it didn't need anyone on the 15mm. Those are better spend as Skyguard crew.

You're joking, right? This must be a joke. Are you telling me that you found the massive profile of the Prowler hard to hit with your quick, zero arc Thunderer cannon? Also you're completely proving why the Prowler was inferior because you're suggesting that instead of filling the third role to make use of the AI/AA gun on the top you should instead roll a Skyguard for AA... Did you not read anything Malorn wrote? You can do the same thing with a Vanguard and not lose out on the coaxial MG whereas if you do that with the Prowler you lose out on a bit of DPS that the original developers for whatever reason balanced that tank around.

[MrBloodworth]

You can't just talk about DPS and call it a day. The fire profiles were also taken into account.

Prowler had arc ( Hard ), Vanguard direct shot ( MED ), and the Magrider had splash ( Easy ).

Also, target profile/Silhouette.

Prowler was tall, Vanguard low profile, Magrider also low, and could strafe.

DPS is not the only balance point.

Also, if I may quote:

1.3 The Greatest Power is Teamwork (1+1=3)
This design principle is one of the greatest, but also the one most at risk because it is so far removed in
recent times. In the early days of PlanetSide we were bombarded with the power of Teamwork. There
were support players piloting galaxies to get their troops to the fight. There were Pilots doing escort.
There were the indoor-armor MAX players who required non-MAX to repair them, open doors, and
access terminals. Much of this is still in the game, but it’s deeper than that.
In the early days the most powerful vehicles in the game were multi-manned vehicles. Tanks were kings,
but they required a crew of two or more. They also required repairmen, but nothing was better at
pushing a front. Lightnings were OK vehicles, but a Vanguard or Magrider was far more dangerous. This
fit with a simple principle – a vehicle that required two players to operate successfully should be more
powerful than a vehicle that only requires one player to operate. It makes sense. It rewards teamwork
with a 1+1=3 philosophy, giving advantage to outfits and factions that promote teamwork.
This design has crumbled over the years of PlanetSide, and there are two reasons for it. First, as more
cert points are given to players, more options are given to players. This is not necessarily a bad thing,
but it affects teamwork because you now need fewer people to accomplish a goal. With more cert
points, every member of a team could be an Advanced Medical. Every member could be an Advanced
Hacker. Every member a pilot. As the number of certification points expands, the differentiation
between players decreases as more and more roles can be filled by a single player. The concept of
“tradeoff” diminishes as everyone becomes a clone with very similar or identical certifications. In effect
what happened was that the purpose of the certification system was eroded and its value diminished.
The second reason this has crumbled is the increasing power of single-player vehicles. BFRs are the
biggest example. They’ve been nerfed over the years, but the most obvious reason for them hurting the
game is that a single player can occupy a vehicle that is very difficult to kill that could absorb or dish out
a lot of firepower. This is disproportionate to multi-manned vehicles. Also, single-person aircraft have
become far more significant over the history of PlanetSide. This is a topic I will cover more later, but for
the scope of this section you just need to understand that as more vehicles and power become
accessible to individuals, the necessity AND power of teamwork diminishes. The game becomes more of
a simple one-man army approach as opposed to a complex network of teamwork and cooperation.
The way to enhance this design is two-fold. First, you increase the value of teamwork. You do this by
making things which require teamwork more rewarding. A simple example is a two or three-man
vehicle. Make them stronger. The other way to enhance the design is to make single-player powerful
options more costly, while making teamwork-oriented activities cheaper. For example, single-player
aircraft could be made to cost more certification points to make it a clear tradeoff, or by having shorter
timers on the multi-manned aircraft (this is just an example, I’m not advocating it…yet).

[Figment]

Has nothing to do with hard to hit, has everything to do with damage output and leading ability of the dual 100mm. As the DPS is much greater for a Prowler over a Vanguard and neither tank is really suited for AA, both will have to bring a Skyguard, making that point moot.

You do realise that faster rate of fire provides more accuracy for arced shots because it's easier to correct your aim based on previous shot? This high rof also makes it much easier to use for instance the main cannons to hit low flying aircraft (and done so a lot myself with jacked Prowlers). Also, the arc is very shallow and cannot be called harder than the Vanguard arc, does it arc more? Ever so slightly, but as stated above, the rof makes up for that in leading ability.

EDIT: I would also like to point out that a tall, but still compact, profile can be used advantageously to fire from behind cover, creating a very small, VISIBLE profile. It does require a different playstyle and the map knowledge of where this is possible.

[Figment]

Also, wait what, Vanguard had AA? You do realise the 20mm could hardly fire skywards?

[Purple]

im still a fan of the lighting