What?!  I didn't think it could get any more teamplay oriented than the way 2142 is already set up!  Ohhh..you've really peaked my interest, now! 

Edit:  I think perhaps I should also urge you to be very careful when trying to do something "original"...While it's admirable and at times worth-while to try to innovate, "original" things may, and often are, not very good at all (especially now, though it may be illusiory, because it seems as if 'everything's been done', so for me, at least, there can only be improvement upon things that already are...in the area of video games and movies, at least).  Although, this is subject to opinion.

I may do just that, though I'll have to get IRC first.  But that shouldn't be too troublesome, I think.

I'll say in advance that I have a feeling that I may be misinterpreting your statement, here, but since I may also not be, I think it fairly harmless to respond:

I think I need to urge you, here, to consider that with caution.  While it's probably not a good idea to implement a weapon that simply kills a vehicle (or anything) in one hit regardless of its placement, vehicle weak points ought to be presence.  One thing about 2142 that I'm very fond of is the existence of vehicle weak-points.  And why, exactly?...

Well, war vehicles are built to be offensively (and defensively) potent, but they all would and do, in fact, have their Achilles heel.  To know those weaknesses, and then be able to exploit them is, I think, essential to the concepts of of fairness and "fun-ness" (if that's a word) in a game of war. 

Similarly, as the pilot, to know those strenghts and weaknesses of your vehicle, and then be able to recognize and place yourself in situations where the strengths are accentuated and avoid situations where the weaknesses could be exploited is again, I think, essential to the concepts of fairness and "fun-ness."  The vehicles retain their offensive/defensive power, but if the pilot and/or gunner(s) is/are lacking, the vehicle will be defeated.  Very fair...and to me, very fun.  And again, I feel like I'm not being clear enough, but I hope you get my meaning.  Of course, if I did in fact misinterpret you, then you can probably disregard this paragraph and the two that preceed it.

Well, first off, I thank you for the 'welcome.'

Secondly, the mentioning of an NDA again arouses within me another query.  Although even to me the query seems close to being irrelevant, it appears to be just one of those things where you want to know, regardless of how important it is, and it's going to sit in the back of your mind irritating you until it's answered.  And so, here it is:

What's the purpose of this NDA?  I can't seem to think of any instance where disclosing any piece of information you developers posess would yield a negative result.  It in fact seems to be quite the opposite, in my mind:  Not only would you satisfy the curiosity of the community, but you'd also be able to recieve valuable feedback, which you could use to make good, and perhaps previously un-thought-of, changes and/or improvements.  So, really...what's its function?

- Stevanyss \steh-VAN-iss\ or \STEH-vuh-niss\

"I was glad to find that mercy is a lie;  I'd rather be an honest man." - RYN-371

Yes, vehicles have strengths and weaknesses. Weak spots are a realistic avenue ..tho still , killing a vehicle in 1 shot is very bad for teamplay. Weak spots would obviously be weaker ...just not that weak.  Also , dont forget , there are other ways in balancing... if you take an ATAT for example ..a weakness that has against other vehicles is its one slow and sluggish mutha.

PS. Are you related to Woodrow by any chance?

I wouldn't have a problem with killing vehicles in one shot if you can also kill players in one shot, ten again that might be a bit too realistic.