[Suggestion] Remove C4 from LA or buff tank HP

yes thats another point people forgot to mention. c4 flashes are just ridiculous. this can be easily fixed: there should be a maximum time before c4 disappears.

and arent u a mag driver on briggs? what r u doing on connery? u say u die to mines but thats because u stealth flank a lot, if u use mine guard mine=useless. i ONLY died ONCE since using mineguard, and thats when i was retreating with half health with a **** ton of infantry around.

John, this guy's got a point here. the guy who c4'd the idiot in the vanguard was already spotted, if u get c4'd by a spotted LA then u deserve it.

but i agree about mass drifters ruining tank gameplay, if u werent there with the sole of spotting them all ur allied tank would of probably died. this is why i said nerf drifter fuel.

but u have to admit c4 flashes are more pathetic than even drifters from valks.

And what logic is there to say that it shouldn't?
Using C4 on someone moving in a straight line is tough: You need to hope that the vehicle keeps going, and that he's so fornicating blind that he doesn't see the C4 being dropped and still drive over it.

So yeah, there's all the reason to penalize it. Just like aircraft or infantry moving in straight lines are penalized.

So... If a tank shoots me I also know what he did, and tanks have long ranges and OHK weapons. Does that make me scream for their nerfing? No! On the contrary, I've been trying to improve tank's lethality... While also giving infantry better options to go toe-to-toe with vehicles so that we can remove the ridiculous walls surrounding most bases.

As I've repeated only a gazillion times, being aware, moving, using prox radar or any other thing you can do does protect yourself, but just like being aware of enemy tanks flanking you does not guarantee you'll survive, so does being attacked by a C4 fairy.
And why should it? You are asking for a 100% guarantee of survival, which should simply not be possible as that's bad for the game.

ive said many times my real complaint is with drifters, not medic/heavy/engineer c4. u cant even see them no matter how "aware" u are. can u actually argue against this point i make? or are u such a hard headed c4 fairy u wont even listen to very reasonable points?

and lets not forget the c4 flash. on tight maps its like 90% success rate. NOTHING can protect u against them, other than open flat ground.

nerf drifter fuel and put a maximum time limit (e.g. 20 seconds) before c4 disappears. these are VERY reasonably requests, the devs really need to consider this.

A better method was to make sure AP isn't the go-to weapon. Almost every tank uses AP, simply because 95% of the infantry can be avoided by positioning, speed and your incredible armor and health, but you can't do that with a tank. Tanks with AP destroy you if you don't have friends to back you up, because they can keep up with you, follow you and destroy you. Especially since keeping your strong armor towards them also means slowing down.
The big problem here is that HE is hardly any better than AP, and that the AI top guns can't multi-role as well as an AP top gun that can easily double with some AI functionality. This means that barely anyone will have any AI loadouts available.


So: AI canons need updates to make them more versatile. Give them an AI function and an AV function, and give all AI guns extreme elevation ranges to better deal with vehicles and possibly multi-role into light AA. The AV function could be a simple capability to damage tanks, which probably isn't enough. Or it could have special abilities such as slowing down hostile tanks to give you time to escape, removing enemy HUD, forcing the enemy to fire randomly (both a blessing and a curse), reduce turret/chassis rotation speed (also good as a light AA function), sap energy and lock up abilities etc.

Also, HE needs to be more unique. Currently it just doesn't offer enough AI firepower over an AP gun with the right accuracy. Grant HE guns an AI co-axial gun for instance to set them farther apart from AP and make them more useful.


And with that folks, you can balance a game without removing functions that are already there. You already see what a single Skyguard can do, imagine if the tank loadouts contained more AI and that these AI guns had (even) better elevation to deal with C4 fairies or double as light AA against aircraft.

You'd be surprised how few times a drifter will be unspottable.
I've already made clear what the defensive options are: Just keep moving. This works fine, and with proper situational awareness you can easily track down and kill any C4 drifters that might still come for you. Moving targets require the player to be lower before they drop the C4, especially due to C4 latency causing the C4 to drop much later and slower than you think. Valkyrie/Galaxy dropped drifters have the highest chance of missing C4 and losing resources without cause... At least if the target is moving. Fortunately, there's always, always some tank nearby just standing stationary, not moving his turret and lobbing shells into his narrow, narrow vision.

As for options to prevent valkyrie/Galaxy dropped fairies being undetectable until the last: C4 is too multi functional. It's fine as it is in it's AI role, it's fine as it is in it's AV role, but to combine that in a single package is too good. So splitting C4 into an AV and an AI variant would be a good solution. AV C4 could be timed and have a tell-tale sound when placed on a tank, after which the crew can destroy it if they are fast (although god knows they've had more than enough time to prevent the C4 attack). Depending on the extra functions an LA gets the timer will be long or short, and the health of the C4 will be large or small. For instance, if an LA can steal empty vehicles the timer is long to give the crew time to kill (or be killed by) the LA and destroy the C4. If the LA does not get any extra's, the health and timer will be short, giving the crew just enough time to find it and destroy it if they react.
AV C4 would need to have it's damaged increased to at least 75% of a tank to prevent Vanguards getting away with a lazy shield activation.

This would prevent the rare Valkyrie/Galaxy dropped Drifters that might encroach on you being completely unnoticeable. If LA's get secondary functions such as stealing vehicles, which I'm totally for, then you get more teamwork among them to place AV C4, kill the crew as they try to disarm it, then steal the vehicle (after destroying their own AV C4).

Just have C4 placed on friendly vehicles disintegrate after a certain amount of time. Again, there's no reason to nerf an entire weapon class because one group is (ab)using some traits of the weapon, just remove that use and all's fine.

Nerfing drifter fuel, or even removing drifters altogether, does not stop Valkyrie/Galaxy dropped C4 fairies that drop stuff from high above. So it's not a reasonable request at all, it's a bad consideration of the result of your proposal.

The video was merely to illustrate that I'm talking about 5+ people drifting from the sky, not an opportunistic C4 LA that "outplays" tankers. Maybe the Vanguard deserved to get C4'd, I don't know. My point is that you can't defend for very long against that many C4 fairies in a Vanguard. It is too slow and the turret elevation doesn't allow for it. They can keep falling and dropping C4, it's not that expensive. Plus, you can redeploy if you're caught, kittenignition repeatedly did today, and keep your C4 for another attempt.

The Vanguard loses 450 nanites, has to pull another tank, and drive back. It's absurd. I'm sure they'll get bored of being bad at some point, so I guess it's reavers and skyguards until then!

Actually no. That was a frag grenade he threw into the hatch. Tank is fine, crew is kill. Not that thats a big difference.
I wouldn't refer to the trailer regarding what is possible in this game or should be, unless you want to get knifed by invisible VS infiltrators.
And lets not forget that this LA later kills a GALAXY with a carbine . I have a longer TTK against that flying brick with my anchored AP Prowler

You missed an important argument too - it isn't that the US hasn't designed new tanks since the M1 Abrams; its just that its been consistently more cost efficient to upgrade existing platforms than deploy entirely new ones.

Until the Abrams goes toe to toe with a threat that it just can't beat this will be the case.

And then, boy oh boy, are all those designs going to come out of the woodworks. If it was better than the Abrams when it was put on paper 5 years ago, just imagine how many iPod docks we can put in it now!

You could probably deadline 90% of the equipment inside of the tank if a frag goes off inside... Just saying.

Try this, light a firecracker in your open palm, now light a firecracker clenched in a fist. do it. It makes a difference.




















For the love of God please dont actually do it... It will blow off your hand...

You're ruining the experiment.

When I said "tank is fine" I kinda meant the chassis and armor, not in the sense of "working condition", but I guess that WAS formulated in a very sloppy way...

It works like that because any force tries to take the easiest way - which is why C4 would actually do nothing at all to armor and you need shaped charges that cannot be thrown around like this if you want to have any effect at all.

And no, I won't try that.
I also won't get you a new airbubble for your mason's level or any other stupidities of the kind.

my nanites and your nanites, sitting by the fire

my nanites say to your nanites

gonna set YO TANK ON FIRE

I know I shouldn't let myself get trolled and react that way...but the guy was deliberately pushing my buttons and I do regret that I let my frustration show.

I just don't understand these guys who are expecting a Mil-Sim adventure out of Planetisde2. It's a pure fantasy game and they act like they were promised a realistic military adventure...

Moving in a predictable pattern on foot will get you DEAD. But of course, tanks should be immune to this right?

We're not using 1990's era "C-4". That's pretty obvious. It's highly advanced AND infused with Nanites.

It totally GIBS a tank. What more do you need to know?

This is like making an argument that the Candy gun is overpowered because candy can't kill you in real life. I mean..get over it will you?

I'm not the one playing the "realism" card, the Crutchside MBT junkies are. I've said over and over again, balance > realism.

You're playing a game where we are immortal. Able to be instantly reconstructed and sent back into battle. So that's totally cool, but we draw the line at what players "expect" from a tank?

its like these but with explosive in the butt
millions, super tiny but very potent, if it gets on you and they go off. . ciao

There's a reason we know what happens, its because of "very special people".

I think it's actually called "(near) puberty and trying to be cool" that sparks those kind of experiments.
Because apparently the amount of "very special people" as you call them that get these kind of accidents isn't all that high, even demographically speaking. Makes you wonder about how "smart" we actually are don't you?