[Suggestion] Bulletproof certification for vehicles

Ahahahahahaha good one.

My tank is rolling on the floor laughing...

So YOU keep on dying to those things again and again, you might want to change the way you approach the situation.

Even if you do, your still going up against equally equipped opponents that respond to your actions, this ain't CoD where your opponents are dumb as f*** and only have PoS equipment. This is a MMOFPS so you will have power differences in different classes and vehicles with different cost and every player has access to these so the best way is to level the playing field through numbers, tactics, counters, etc.

You're doing something wrong then because I've solo'd tanks as a heavy assault in the open field.

And Light Assault

And Engineer.

And I've even killed a couple tanks in the open field between bases as Medic. (Dat C4 ♥♥♥♥ )

I've even got tank kills as Infiltrator... I was on a WRAITH of course but since you have to be an Infil, and Flashes hardly count for offering protection, I'm counting it

As a MAX I've gone on tank killing sprees.

I can't imagine how terrible this game would be if tanks were damaged by bullets.

No... just... oh my god no you are either the best troll/put Stew to shame or you really have no idea how bad what your asking for would be and would effectively completely remove armor from the game.

Even 12 magazines.

Even TWENTY magazines.

No. Just no no no no no no NO.

When I saw this thread title I originally thought, you know with all the Valkyrie talk going around, that it was actually suggesting a defense slot eliminating/suppressing small arms fire, which might not be such a bad idea.

If you sextuple the amount of health and armour an MBT has, we'll talk about removing small arms resistance.

Alarox's point was that infantry similarly don't have upkeep, logistic or other "cost". So when you bring up the fact that PS2 tanks don't take fuel or get caught in terrain (actually they do get caught in terrain), infantry also don't have to face this problem.

In other words you'd only have a point if infantry needed to eat, sleep, manually reload their magazines, got sick, etc. That simply doesn't happen, so requiring tanks to follow logistical rules while infantry do not would be unfair.

As for options... infantry have a number of options in dealing with tanks:
AT and ATGM launchers, which are available for 0 cost
C4 or AT Mine charges, which can instakill tanks
Pulling your own MBTs/Lightnings/Aircraft to deal with enemy armor

Or you can just die. That works plenty well too. Because if you refuse to take advantage of the many things in the game that can unrealistically defeat armor, then you really deserve to lose.

That is not a choice. That is like asking if you would like nanoweave armor or ammo for your weapon on your infantry classes....

Or you could use the rocket launcher that HA's get by default...
Alternatively you could branch your gameplay to go beyond your current repertoire and maybe, just maybe you'll find that your suggestion is crazy talk.

Or to say he can either have his shield, or his primary weapon, or his class ability/toys.

There are less resources than before. You are just repeating what someone told you once.

The reality is that with the old system i could pull 2 libs and then pull 2 tanks and then pull 2 libs and then pull 2 tanks.

Now i can pull one lib or one tank and im done.

If you are counting using multiple types (air, land, max) then sure, there are less resources. But you can now pull a single type much faster. And sunderers, costing only 200? You have to die to mines coming right off the pad to run out.

Instead of making things unrealistic why don't we allow drivers to be shot through the window shield. So infantry can stand in front of an incoming vehicle, kill the driver/pilot through the windshield, vehicle stops, and it auto ejects everyone within the vehicle out. We could have surprise attacks and guerrilla warfare all over Hossin and this would benefit underpopped factions and making travelling on the road more exciting.

Cutting your foot to alleviate pain from your hand isn't a good philosophy to use in situations like these. I know we want to make infantry play as much fun as possible but we must not forget others. The more seperated this game is, the more easier it will fall. So if we want to make infantry more effective at fighting armour even though their quite good enough then I have several suggestions.

A) Get your allies together and work together to attack the tanks with lock ons, armour, air, or turrets if available.
B) Switch to another fight since 12 people cannot fight 48+.
C) Buff RL effectiveness against tanks with either a new ammo type, higher stats on certain or all rocket launchers, or an entirely new rocket launcher.
D) Add more turrets, walls, or/and terminals to further supply infantry with more ways of deterrence.
E) Your fighting against a fully certed or SCed out tank or a BR 100 who's got a lot more gadgets and experience than you have.

Again you are just repeating what someone told you.

Before the change you could jump around to different continents and get more resources. You would also gain significant resources from kills.

Before the change i rarely had to wait for resources. Now i spend half my time waiting for resources. Auto-running watching TV and wishing there was a game i could just continually have fun in.

Thats why i have suggested having nanite costs be related to loadouts. Heavy AI loadouts would cost a lot of resources and AV loadouts would not.

I'm not interested in playing as infantry. I like to fight tank vs tank battles and i like to fly A2A ESFs. To me infantry is just a lemming fest where you die frequently from things you never saw. Vehicles offer more strategic and in depth gameplay.

There is no reason why we shouldn't be able to pretty much endlessly pull AV loadouts and fight each other. This is supposed to be a combined arms game not an infantry-only game.

Infantry combat is often very unsatisfying. Its just whack-a-mole, getting sniped from invisible infils at ranges you cant return fire. Fragged endlessly by tanks and sunderers. Walking over cleverly placed but completely skilless silly land-mines.

Sometimes i do enjoy infantry, but for the most part the gameplay is so shallow it gets old very fast.

I just wanna fly around and shoot at other planes, why shouldn't i be able to do that as much as i want? Why should i have to auto-run for 7 mins every time i want to pull another ESF.

At least before i could pull a tank in between planes and go hunt some skyguards. Now i cant pull a tank, i cant buy grenades or bettys or anything. If i AM playing infantry to gain resources instead of auto-running, i can no longer afford to pull a burster max to fend off airplanes, or a skyguard, because I'd rather use those resources on an ESF.

So i just don't understand how there are more vehicles. 250 resources in 5 mins is NOT good. Before you could almost always find a continent that was giving more than 250 every 5 mins, and along with that you could fight in areas that gave the resource type you needed. On top of that, the resource timers were not the same across continents, so it was possible to get a tick on 3 continents in 5 mins.

Now whether or not i think all of this is good or bad is not the point. The point is with less resources you can pull less vehicles. Unless you were not really a vehicle puller and didnt bother to max your resources. THEN you might have earned less. But you had lots of ways of increasing cert gain before that are no longer available. Imo resource system has been simplified and dumbed down for the little kids who will play on ps2. They are so pumped with sugar they would never be able to figure the old system out.

Please look for your sanity and if you can't, just give up what is left of your insanity.

The last rank should reflect bullets back to the user and kill them.

before resource gain was avg 50 per 5 minutes... * 3 types that's 150 every 5 minutes

New resource is 50 every 5 minutes... AND No need to go waste 30 minutes ghost capping a majority continent if you run out. 250 every 5 minutes.


New resource is FAR more spammable in the long run, it just has a lower "Bank" cap.

9 minutes for an MBT instead of... oh how long? 45 minutes for 450 mechanized?

New resource system makes it easier for people to specialize in 1 role. FAR easier. And I still rarely run out unless I'm chain pulling nanites to death.

Average was not 50 lol. Not to mention OPTIONS. Yes if you wanted to just sit on your behind and not try to increase you resource income then there were times when the gain was bad.

BUT if you were willing to jump to another continent you could easily earn WAY more than 150 every 5 mins. You could get 200 air 150 vehicle and 100 infantry resources in one tick on Amerish. You could then jump to Esamir. Get a tick there, and back to indar for the final tick and by the time 5 mins was up, and that would be the absolute max amount of time spent, you could often fill all 3 resource pools in 5 mins.

Add to that the fact that if i went to fight over J908 all i needed was a couple ESF kills and id have enough resources for another plane.

On top of that, since i fly all 3 empires, i had the option of selecting an empire that was in control of Amerish which always had the best air resource income.

Now there are ZERO options. Its very easy. You don't have to think, or DO anything. But it doesnt come close to matching the amount of resources you COULD earn with the previous system.

Not to mention like i said, now im only gaining one type of resource instead of 3, so i NEVER EVER have resources for anything but flying.

Before i could go play infantry and buy some grenades or whatever. Now i wont buy anything with resources because i need them to do what i prefer which is fly around and shoot things.

Anyway the thread is about making tanks vuln to small arms because there are too many vehicles which i disagree with. And also allowing small arms to damage tanks is a bad idea, they are already too weak.

It was called No Man's Land because it was no man's; neither side controlled it.

This is technically correct; I took some poetic license.