Should C4 DMG be tweaked versus Vehicles ?

Note : I'm not a vehicle user myself so I have no vested interest in any nerfs ...

It's just a thought that came to me while sitting in a AV turret watching Tanks fights below ..

That thought was ... " How good is C4 as a vehicle killer when chasing tanks with bricks of it becomes a valid tactic "

And I mean chasing as in actual chasing .. Engi's and LA's running at tanks on foot ..

Now I know there are two parties in this .. Tankers and C4's user ... But talking unbiasedly could C4 uses a slight dmg nerf versus vehicles ?

Damage needs to be reduced to 50% per brick for MBTs & lightnings, but other than that it's fine.

it needs a buff, one brick for one tank

Would you rather face someone running at you, or someone popping over a small hill and shooting a rocket at you? Nerf C4 and you'll have a lot more rockets coming your way.

Damage is fine IMHO.

Problem is still the Forward Impetus is has (throw dist), and that it doesn't Glow when thrown like FragGrenades do.
It's not just vehicles who suffer unavoidable deaths to C4, it's actually Infantry who suffer the most according to stat-hards.

As a field sniper, yes I'd love that. I'd love it to death. LA's don't ever have to slow down & stop serpentining like rocket primaries do; so headshotting them is something I only usually pull off at the exact moment they're flying in a straight line.

Step 1: Remove HE weapons from MBTs and Lightnings.
Step 2: Remove C4 from all classes but Engineer.
Step 3: Give LA AV grenades to make up for this loss.
Step 4: Limit maximum deployable AV Mines to 2; Increase AV mine damage 75%.
Step 5: EMP grenades now disable vehicle activatables and ability to eject. (Shields, Boosters, Fire Suppression, Deploy & Undeploy)

Two bricks killing is fine, but a single brick should deal more like 50% damage, not 70-75%.

Or, just halve C4 damage against tanks via a damage to modification. It'd still take two C4 to kill a tank (either tank) so practicioners of the "drop bombs" arts will not have any worse a time than before. Nothing will be lost and some people will feel better.
Honestly, don't completely upset the applecart for no reason. That's the worst sort of balance. Each of the other things you suggested has to be considered individually.

Edit: and I have no clue what good you want to change AT mines to 75%, but restrict their deployed number to two. That's an outright nerf to defense, even if the intention were an indirect way of getting at Engineers who solo-bombing deploy shield S-AMSes.

Remember back in the day when 1 c4 brick was enough to destroy a lightning or ser a MBT on fire. 2 would destroy a sunderer.

Admittedly it's a sweeping change, but I think the issue most people have with C4 is the abundance versus the actual power. At least 2 classes ALWAYS carry C4 (Medic/LA) because really, what else would they carry?

I am slightly pushing my Agenda that Engineer should be and should of always been the explosive specialist class, but I think that would resolve a lot of issues.

EMP grenade changes just let another class participate in AV activites in a meaningful and useful way.

And removing HE from MBTs/Lightnings does NOT includes Harassers and Sunderers, the goal being to create a valid reason to have AI vehicles with AV vehicles.

The Mine change? I dunno, filler? ^_^

If you're in a tank, what would you rather see?

I don't like it because it's too viable not because I hate dying to it,too many players use C-4 and rockets as their primary method of vehicle control. It's efficent,it's not THAT hard to get in close quarters with a tank and the infantry players sacrifice nothing until they throw the C-4. Whereas a tank needs to be maintained,is a much bigger and more visible target and needs to be pulled and driven to it's destination while tying up a significant amount of nanites as LA with C-4 you've almost always got full nanites and just need to wait for someone to bring their tank to your base.

I'd love to have C4 become lest frustrating for both parties, but as it stands C4 is literally the only thing keeping the Light Assault viable in a fight. Until the Light Assault gets some tools for the tool slot or some serious buffs, the devs hands are tied on the C4 issue because nerfing or changing C4 at all will completely unhinge an entire class.

C4 should definitely be tweaked. The damage should be double what it is today.

Increase the damage as you shrink the blast radius proportionally. Wouldn't matter if it landed/attached to the target, but it would make some other things a lot less ridiculous feeling.

Or adjust for vehicle damage accordingly. These forums are schizophrenic. You have two threads, one saying that vehicle are too strong and farm infantry and another that infantry anti vehicle weapons are too strong and need to be toned down.

What actually happens of course is that each individual posting is trying to dictate their favorite style of gameplay on everyone else.

Yeah, it's hard to say where the issue lays. But I think for virtually every problem it's over saturation. No one complains about one or two tanks. One issue lays in the game never having decided where it's focus is because I'm really hard pressed to call it combined arms.

I like where C4 stands right now personally. I'd even like to see a slight buff to damage versus sundies.

I'm just curious.. what about soldiers running up to vehicles in order to place explosives on them strikes you as somehow an 'invalid' tactic?

Remove C4 from LAs.

Buff it.

Allow Engineers to carry both C4 and anti-tank mines.

Make mines only detonate when an enemy vehicle drives over it. The only other way to destroy a mine would be for an engineer to disable with their repair tool.