Make HA slower, LA and Inf faster.

Given, it is rather far into the future, so it's likely that materials research has improved. If we were to compare to today's Interceptor Body Armor, which has a 16.5 lb weight and a 50/50 likelihood of stopping 5.56 NATO rounds, we'd likely compare it being of approximate weight to medieval plate armor, and LA armor being identical.

Hell, I just wish adrenaline pump would be buffed a little bit and moved to passive for LA/Infil. HA slowdown would be great but I think the tears would flow too strong...

They could make it so the slowdown while shields are active is an always-on slowdown. It's not much of a slowdown. Likely 15%. As for making others faster, that is a terrible idea with the netcode and lag compensation creating even greater warping during simple strafing. This was the reason that in Planetside 1 they ended up disabling weapon usage while using the "Surge" implant. People would just become too hard to hit as they'd be warping all over. Especially with higher ping. And when strafing or otherwise intentionally exploiting it. So slowdowns would work. Speedups not a great idea.

So with all that extra armour they are carrying, not counting the extra over-shield, they really should have higher base health than the rest as well. It's only logical since they actually wear extra armour. Right?

Great we agree, all that metal should equal to an extra 250 hp.

Or you apply simple videogame logic and nanites and your entire post is pointless.

I'd gladly give the HA more health. They are, as stated earlier, "MAX-Lite." This game needs more class diversity.

although i dont see how or why anyone believes that HA's are op i support any idea that gives LA and infy's a base boost in speed. all i play is infil and id love it that much more if it was a little bit quicker. it helps immersion and helps negate the needless 900hp. seriously. being invisible isnt all that powerful, why the 100 less hp?

As long as the shield speed debuff is reduced so that the speed with the shield on would be about the same as it is now, then I support this.

Nerf everything in the game; since BETA this has been the call of the community.

The thing you guys are missing about armor... the entire point of weight-reduction technology in armor is specifically so you can put more on. 400 years ago, fifty pounds of plate armor was a lot of protection, but a lot of weight. Nowadays, we can be just as protected (against modern arms) with only thirty pounds of armor... but if you increase it to fifty pounds, well, now you're even MORE protected. Thus why in Afghanistan we wear a ****ton of armor. It's better armor than you would've gotten in Vietnam even though the weapons are the same. The point is, we made the armor lighter so we could wear more.

In game terms, there's another consideration - the reason the Light Assault has a jetpack, no extra toys except some C4, and a little carbine and handgun, is because the jetpack simply cannot lift that much. Therefore the LA carries a lighter load.

this isn't even remotely true, and depends entirely on which historical period you happen to sight. even in the mid evil ages people were always trying to make armor lighter so that people could have the same protection with less weight, not the same weight with even more bulk.

Go look at the evolution of tanks and tell me that. The entire point of armor technology for tanks has specifically been to get more armor without changing the overall weight and size of the chassis.

we are talking about infantry ... infantry armor has always been about reducing weight and keeping adequate protection, not keeping it the same.

this has to do with the fact that infantry are not powered by gas turbines and tend to get tired.

And yet when you go to Afghanistan you're more likely to get ESAPIs, which are heavier than SAPIs. By your logic our body armor these days would weigh almost nothing. Do you have any idea just how much **** you have to carry on patrol? We went as far as throwing out parts of MREs we didn't want to reduce weight.

And yet, the concept is the same: the carrying capacity of a tank cannot really change, so the armor has to be better yet weigh the same. The carrying capacity of your typical grunt hasn't changed either.

If you have the technology to make armor with equal protection but half the volume and weight, you're a ******* moron if you don't at some point figure that you can now wear twice as much armor. But that's probably why you're not in charge of war.

you dont seem to get it, no engineer worth there salt says "lets make it as heavy as we can" they say "let give adequate protection" many soldiers in the field even today would ditch that heavier armor for something lighter or less bulky/restrictive if it came along. but I'm not gonna take the time to go over how materials research hasent changed much since the invention of the small arms insert and composite plate.

there is a difference between making armor light and making armor work, its a balancing act. you bet your *** if they could make armor that would stop a 7.62 and felt like wearing a t-shirt they wold.

the carrying capacity of a tank is directly related to its engineering, people do not change.

Alright you know what, you go ahead and actual prove your point with some real evidence instead of make-believe anecdotes. I'll wait here in the world of reality, where reduction in armor weight was compensated for by giving soldiers either more armor overall (they didn't have groin, shoulder, and neck protection a couple decades ago, now we do. Weird) or by carrying more ****.

lol, you know nothing. Tank weight is also limited by the surfaces they have to travel on, the equipment that has to be used to transport them, and the performance we expect from them. Conversation's done, you don't know what you're talking about on any of this.

Tanks need to be heavy to withstand the recoil of their own weapons. Also, once you got used to the weight of medieval armor, you could go swimming, backflip, and do full-on gymnastics in full plate. Just saying.

Armor today, however, is not built to stop swords, clubs, and axes. It is built to stop bullets, and the occasional knife. Plate armor is good at stopping a sword being swung into your chest, but not bullets. Why we phased plate out and went back to cloth. Cloth is more likely to absorb bullet and stop it. It's also getting lighter because logistic stuff and what we're sending soldiers out there with slapped to their backs.

Edit: As for the OP, why not make the HA a slight bit slower? Don't think running around with an LMG should mean you're still capable of doing a triathalon.

you might have to first. you are the one saying that tanks cant be engineered to carry more weight completely ignoring that tanks have only been getting heavily due to advances in engineering that you cant apply to infantry. but hey, whatever i'm done with your silliness. many people in the field complain about the very bulky armor that they keep getting.

again that has to so with engineer want to make it travel over a soft surface then you widen the tracks, its kind of why tracks exist in the first place in their current state, because they found wheels just dont cut it with that weight. at the moment short of an exoskeleton you cant do that to a person, they are born in a specific configuration.

That has exactly nothing to do with it. You don't balance around realism. You balance against power and effectiveness in the game. That has nothing to do with realism. There is no realistic reason for infiltrators not being allowed shotguns when they can carry a high powered sniper rifle. If you can handle a .50 cal rifle, then a little pump action shotgun shouldn't be a problem. Same with explosives. If you can lug around two AI mines then two bricks of C4 shouldn't be a problem. So why don't they get those weapons? Because that would make them too powerful. Considering the size of the ammo pack, there's no reason why everyone shouldn't be equipped with one. Why are they not built into the guns in the first place? Game balance. How about that little medic gun or recon dart gun? Why are they limited to one class when they could easily replace the regular side arm in terms of size and weight? Yet again, game balance. How come you can take a 40 mm grenade from the Marauder to the face and live when you will die instantly to a hand thrown grenade if you are within a couple of meters? You guessed it, game balance before realism and real world logic.