Nanoweave 4 vs Flak 4: Generalisations

This seems to be a personal choice, and there are a lot of people who swear by flak (in the days of HE vehicle spam and the pre-nerf air it was almost mandatory).

However, I have been thinking....

1. Nanoweave 4 (affordable to everyone) is 20% boost to HP, right? Against all weapons, right?

2. Flak 4 (equally affordable) is a 39% (let's say 40%) boost to HP. Against explosions only.
However it does allow you to survive AP mines, and nanoweave 4 (unlike nano 5 vs snipers) offers no such "immunity" to a specific weapon i.e. say pistols. That said - does flak armour even protect against direct hits?

I've picked Nano 4 and Flak 4 as a baseline because despite I doubt the "average" player would have nano 5 on the majority of their characters.

My question: since grenades and AoE weapons have been pretty severely nerfed.... wouldn't most deaths come from bullets - by a long margain?

In a rather simplistic way... (I know I am generalizing and ignoring many variables) could you say

flak is twice as effective as nano weave
therefore
nano would have to be useful, twice as often (and I think it is useful, more than twice as often)

Since I am pretty sure people die from bullets far more than twice as often then they die from explosions, this makes nano look more attractive to me, and I am in the process of switching back over to it....

I'm not pretending to be an expert here - this is just my understanding of how they work, which could be rather flawed - is there a better way to look at it than this rather simplistic approach, without becoming too an@l retentive?(aka datamining with special scripts, etc)

For example, could we collate all kills from tanks, liberators, grenades and bazookas (AoE) and compare them as a ratio to all other small arms - is there a link where I can find this info?

Well. It really depends on who you are fighting, guns with higher RPM are inherently FAR more resistant to nanoweave then slow firing weaponry.....

Against the NC 200 damage guns, you are adding a quarter of a second to their TTK (Note, their TTKs average at .47, where as the average gun is around .51 seconds... So this evens it all out.)
Albiet, their guns are more resistant to nanoweave below level 5.... But at 10 meters, all bets are off.


Against the TRV, you are adding like... .14 seconds to the TTK.

I use nanoweave 5 on my LA, as it is an all round help for whatever situation you're in. I'll put on flak if I'm respawning somewhere and know I'll need the extra resistance for lamo invis prox/betty mines.

You pretty much need both, but for a general use class nanoweave is by far more useful for LA/medic/Engi/infil. A HA general class might roll flak for fighting tanks.

I've been considering a move to nano since I've noticed I can survive AP mines with it. Using LA I don't often hit them so I use nano, but I hit one and survived recently.

Also HE just isn't as abundant as it used to be, and more people are using grenade alternatives since the frags really do suck.

Both are good, just depends on the situations, and most importantly, your playstyle. Use what suits your playstyle.

Flak provides resistance to your overral shield and health, not just health or shield.

It's pretty insane. Imagine if Nanoweave gave you 20% + health and shields.

I have Nano 5 and Flak5 ... i will never use Nano... just try Flak and see the change.... i can not even tell you if i am wearing nano5 or nothing, its just 1 freaking bullet its such a waste of Certs. Once the Cert reset comes in i will reset all Nanoweave i have certed.. really guys.. its just in your head. In the game it changes nothing... Flak on all classes is so much better... Once you go Flak you never go back...

I feel dubious about wearing flak every time I step out the door. It doesn't protect against direct hits and everyone seems to be able mysteriously get direct hits with every explosive weapon in the game. TL;DR I die to explosive weaponry in one hit anyway so I'm thinking of moving back to Nano.

The only time I feel it conclusively helps is vs 1) grenades and 2) ESF rocket pods.

I'd used to run with Flak on my HA but recently with the over abundance of shotguns I have swapped back to Nano .. I haven't noticed an increase in Death's by explosives , but I have noticed the benefit of Nano ..The times that little extra health as kept me alive long enough to get around a corner and hit a medi kit has made it a worthwhile swap

flak 5 with a resist shield on gives you immunity to grenades, they do less than a bars worth of shield damage, flak 5 is insanely better than nanoweave,

I use nanoweave 4 on my medic because it has good synergy with my maxed out nano regen since it heals based on % and not on absolute values. I use it as a heavy shield of sorts.

nanoweave 4 is not enough of an increase in health to survive one more bullet from anything other than SMGs used at long range or TR default pistol bullets also used at long range.

in comparison, flak 4 will give you a ****ton of protection from pretty much everything in the game that kills you without you being able to do anything about it.

Nanoweave is good if you fight at mid-rong range. Protects vs being OHK'd by snipers. Let's you eat another bullet or so. Very nice.

I know Flak does dramatically more to protect you: I just reckon I die 20x more to bullets.

Just, since the nerf to AoE weapons such as grenades, HE shells, liberator guns, etc Flak is no longer "mandatory" and more "situational."

Doesn't a direct shot ignore flak anyway? Splash damage does not often kill (except APMs) and nano helps (admittedly only a little) with that, too.

I can't remember the last time I died to a grenade. You pretty much have to run over and stand on top of the flashy red light. Been concussed, flashed and smoked dozens of times in the same period though. I think I died to one APM in a week.

However I HAVE walked away on a bar or two of health from firefights over half a dozen times I recollect in the same period.... not that nano is "better" but it seems it is more useful in 90% of situations...

Though most tanks hit you dead on, I admit if I am facing tanks as a HA or Engineer I DO wear flak. (I have an "outdoor" setup with a longer range gun and scope, flak and a/tk... vs my "base" engineer setup)

Just saying.... I feel flak has become less mandatory and more situational....

I also think we tend to remember APMs, Dalton and tank shell survivals more vividly as we as infantry players were ingrained to fear them when they were overpowered/players instinctivelty hate insta-kill weapons (a la pumps). E.g. think of the rage directed at AT mines compared to the far more OP AV turret... cos one insta-kills you and the other ...kills you just as relentlessly and from far further away but you FEEL you can do something to avoid your fate....

I use flak 4 with a maxed out medic gun and maxed nano regen. I can activate the ability and run out, survive non direct explosions to revive people and run back to cover very quickly.

Nanoweave= survive most headshots from snipers or AP mine. Quite useful for Engi or Medic

Or if you play offensive HA.

I tried to play with the nano 4, and I went back rapidly to my flak 4 when I got tired of being one shotted by AP mines.

nanowave maxed beats flak maxed by a lot, with nanowave you will survive BOTH mine explosions and bullets.
As HA, the ONLY way to go is resist shield and nanowave.
If you die because of the mines, equip irnv and you will see them no matter what...let the vehicles sport flak, srsly...

I have lost count how many times I have died in 1-on-1 fights and see my opponent with 1 or 0 bar of health left and still alive. In those situations extra 20% health would have certainly made a difference.