Why Can every infantry class deal with armor?

ESF's are also spammable, so why don't all infantry classes have AA?

Because the fact that the exclusivity of infantry AV would force the remaining AV options to be more powerful, lest we want a server to permanently die from an unbreakable warpgating.

It takes 60-90 bullets to half kill an ESF. (More if composite armored.)
Many infantry have 100 rounds in a magazine.


Literally every infantryman has AA good enough to damage an ESF....

There is a lot of risk in C4-ing a tank. Smart tankers won't get in a situation where they can be easily C4-ed. If a light assault or heavy or medic or engy gets C4 on me they deserve the kill, well done.

The only infantry vs tank imbalance imho is the AV turret. It needs to have declining damage over long ranges OR a range limit. The problem is you can get killed pretty quickly by an AV turret that is far beyond your range as a tank. You see little specks in the distance that are spamming very high damage rockets at you. It is kind of ridiculous.

Not as ridiculous as hoverspammers killing a full health Vanguard with shield on in 1.5 seconds though. That is just idiotic and Higby should be ashamed. If they want to know why people are leaving, look at hoverspammers, AV turrets, pump action shotguns and Strikers killing Liberators.

Many bad decisions being made.

How about no.

How about yes.

Every class has a role, and every class's role should not be anti armor. Light Assaults roll is it to get over walls or cliffs to gain preliminary entry...for the other specialty classes. THATS IT. I think that fact that a light assault can kill a tank in any way shape or form is wrong. By your logic infiltrators and medics should have an anti armor skill. WRONG. Thats the thinking of stupid people.

Because every infantry class also has access to Tanks.
what is your point.

Thanks, I will try to be more liberal with the Q button next time I think I know where the turret may be.

Thanks, it is helpful to know that at long range you cannot tell whether there is or is not an Engineer engaging the turret.

Hopefully they will make some changes to the AV turret rocket rendering and particle effects to make these threats a bit more vulnerable to being spotted. I do not want to see them make substantive changes to the AV turrets but they do behave an awful lot like the Pheonix from a manueverability and damage perspective- I know you cannot fire them from behind cover but the additional range of the AV turrets can make them really difficult to manage. Making these threats more visible by reliably rendering rockets and rocket trails would probably go a long way to keep tankers from complaining about them on the forums.

I see what you did there. So on that note because every infantry can kill a flash they shouldn´t need to have any specialized AV weapons, right?

They were limited with an unlock systems in ps1? L.M.A.O - I've been suggesting this for a month now and never knew this was the way it was in PS1!

So now that you all know how awesome I am, I'm going to kick you all in the bollocks.

This is exactly the thing they should have kept in and if they still had it, they could make tanks fearsome again. I never played the tank role that much anyway, but I never bother with them now. I do use my SG quite a lot but I never engage infantry and I can hide and still be effective with it.

Tanks however should make your ******* bones quake in your flesh as they approach.

Funnily enough the only class I thought WOULD have it!

"Well I made it into the enemy base but i got **** all to blow the turrets up with!"

Jalek asked that since ESFs are spammable, why doesn't every infantry have AA capabilities and got educated to the fact that every infantry does, in fact, have AA capabilities against ESFs. I don't see how your comparison with the Flash enters into that equation. The topic was AA against ESFs, not AA against any kind of target.

They do it's called a gun

Thinking about it, if people are saying that LA's need to be nerfed the problem probably stems from giving LA's a very finite role with which they can be effective.

As people we look for ways to make ourselves useful and effective. If you make a sniper class that is only effective when sat on high places then you will only find snipers in high places and doing nothing else.

Maybe the LA suffers more abuse because it's more effective at blowing up sundies than any other class? I don't play LA but I do play infi so I know the feeling about having had nothing done to either of our classes except to make them harder to play (jetpack sound, which I honestly cannot argue about and the messed up cloak and cloak sound of the infi) - they have said though that infi's will at least be looked at, LA's can't be far behind either now, considering the ****** stats we have.

Yeah, in PS1 you were given 1 cert point per battlerank (plus a few to start with). You could invest those cert points in roles or vehicles to unlock them, and once a day or so you could uncert something to reinvest those certs into something else if you wanted to. Certs also had prerequisites, so you couldn't cert an MBT without certing a Lightning first for example.

As a result (and because MBTs were crewed) vehicles could be powerful without overwhelming the battlefield, because only dedicated vehicle players bothered to invest all their certs into them. Unlike now, where everyone pulls tanks as throwaway transport because hey, why not?

Looking at the video's of people using them they look relatively easy to hit targets as long as your mouse sensitivity is set correctly - all they're doing is putting the sight pixel over the target pixel and going on from SOE's theme, every gun must factor to the lowest skilled play to use.

Tankies get the god mode tanks they want as soon as they make them rare.

Currently a tank is nothing more than one player. The only limitation is resources and that is no limitation at all.

If we have a combination of:

a) longer timers
b) more than one operator needed
c) restrictions on classes available in return for driving one

then you can have thicker armor.

Until then you are no more important in your tank than anyone playing infantry. Even snipers. As such you get to remain vulnerable.

I've been asking myself that for awhile.

C4 should be given to infiltrators, engineers should have mines and mana turrets (but cannot carry both, that's major design fail), and heavy assault should have AV. That's it.

I'm actually not even sold that the heavy assault should have the AV. I feel that's too much power and flexibility to give to one class.

I don't know how to reorganize the classes, but the HA are just too good all around at too many things. Engineers too.

Infantry needs to be specialized. We need a basic infantry class, a light assault class, medic, engineer, AV, and infantry support. Basic infantry has been fused with medic which is fine. The engineer should really be the ones with the AV. Infantry support should get LMGs and ammo resupply with the ability to switch out the infantry supply for a turret. Afterall, they are infantry support.

I hate the class balance now. It makes no sense.

Cos QQ

Spam as in tank zergs

With that mentality, there's no reason to play the game.

I have only used AV turrets a little and that was in VR so it is hard for me to really weigh in on the subject with solid experience, however, that being said I personally found the AV turret to be very reliable in mid range but found that judging when/how much to correct the rocket becomes exponentially more difficult the further out the target. IMO, most activities- if you practice and spend time tailoring your settings specifically for that purpose- will become much easier to perform. For instance, when I first started flying I was terrible but after repeatedly using an ESF almost exclusively for transportation I found that my familiarity with the vehicle and ability to dogfight improved greatly- I'm still no ace pilot, far from it, but experience has taught me that I prefer to increase the sensitivity in aircraft compared to infantry. I imagine that AV turrets are similar, where if you have a lot of time behind one then your proficiency will increase but there will always be some people who appear very highly skilled compared to others. Hitting a stationary target from range is probably not so tricky and certainly the rockets not rendering makes it much more difficult (if not impossible) to dodge them as a tanker- still, when you start taking damage and begin repositioning, I find it impressive when Engineers can continue making reliable hits at those distances.