Remove C4 from Light Assaults

Go look at PTS, and the PTS notes.
You can see the full effects for yourself, and decide if you see it as Armor or a defensive measure without any doubt or similar.

1: What walls are you talking about?
2: Despite knowing that people are constantly throwing C4 through a particular wall, you still stick by that wall? That's insane!

And because someone cheats and exploits, let's remove a weapon that's only indirectly connected to the exploits, rather than actually fixing the exploits and/or banning the exploiters! Because that's a way better idea!

Hey did you know? The HA is most often used for cheats and exploits, so let's remove the HA instead of the cheats! Yeah!

Unlike C4, which kills everything in a wide blast radius but does so from shotgun distances rather than sniper ranges. Oh, and it costs nanites. And you can only carry two. And it can't be resupplied. And only the LA can truly sneak up on tanks with it and be effective...

It's easy to make an argument if you only pick a single stat. "omg, LMG's are OP because they can carry two to six times as much ammo as any other gun!". Yes, but because of all the other stats like ROF, COF, bloom, First Shot Multipliers, hipfire, recoil, reload, damage per shot, they aren't instantly OP.
Just like a Carbine's ROF alone doesn't make it OP.
Or a Sniper rifle's accuracy doesn't make it OP.
etc.

Grenades cost nanites too and can't be resupplied, and they don't do ****. You can see them coming, you can run away from their kill range, and they're a nightmare to get them where you want them to go.

So why is C4 so much more powerful?
You don't HAVE to use it at shotgun range, you can plant them in advance, but LA just toss them from safety.

Grenades can be used in different situations. You can throw them further than C4. Grenades can cause alot of chaos in a point hold, weakening the enemy defending the point, and are far from useless.

I kill people with grenades, and they have no hope in hell in surviving.

Well thrown grenades can not be dodged - And grenades can be thrown far.

If you place C-4 in advance, it shows up on the mini-map to anyone with anti-explosive implants, or has an EMP, or plans ahead.
LA's rarely get those "safety" bits for C-4.

It's for fighting vehicles, which has one-hit kills..
If Tanks didn't have to care about C-4, they would have no reason to not camp right under a bridge without a damn.

So why would you remove C4 completely from the LA if you think grenades are the problem? You say it yourself: Grenades are weak, they don't do ****. But once again instead of saying "well if grenades are weak, why not buff them?", you instantly say "let's remove C4 from a few particular classes, but not actually change C4..."

I mean that's just fishing for arguments in the hopes you strike gold at some point and have something that actually is a reason to change C4. But so far you only come up with comparisons to C4, and then jump to a weird conclusion that it needs to be removed from some classes but not changed?

I don't know if grenades need a buff, though? As you said a well used one can kill, but a poorly used one is worthless.
But on the flip side, I can get loads of cheap kills with C4 with no skill, at least more kills than I would get using anything else in the game. Hell, vehicles kill in one shot a lot but they usually see me coming and I got 20 players firing on my from different directions, but C4 is sneaky and easy by comparison.

In short, I can personally get more kills and have a larger battle influence with 450 nanites worth of C4 than by pulling a MBT or MAX

I also just like to mention that only 2 vehicles can be oneshotted with one brick tanks and sunderer iirc even the ant survive one brick no problem ... so i take it his problem with c4 is against maxes primarily .... other than that however both maxes and infantry have both access to flak armor which shall get a change likely even a buff as well ..

And what to say of the people you killed with a short-ranged manually detonated explosive charge?

Vehicle Radar.
Sensor Darts.
Understanding vertical ledges, positions, vulnerability.

No, you would need to use 50 nanites to weaken a MAX to be finished off by an ally or the LA's own rocklet rifle. A MAX that's suddenly at less than 30% HP is pretty much dead, as their retreat time is really slow. And before you say "what if it's being repaired?"... then that's a costly force multiplier in addition to another player the LA is up against, so you need someone to help provide extra alpha damage.

And C-4 is not the only option; synced rockets or Archer headshots will instantly kill a MAX without any nanite cost.

And? Shouldn't something so universally lethal have drawbacks other than resource cost? Plus it's not like it's the only viable AV/anti-MAX option...

Which is why I considered 4. And as I said, my idea was to tone down the disproportionately powerful tool who's only drawback is time.

Hmmm, definitely something to consider. I'd pull the "but then they don't have [insert useful defense slot]" card, but it's hard to think of something better than C-4 resistance. I could use a refresher on the upcoming changes in slot options, if any.

Pretty much. Less insta-death, but more tries after a success (due to carrying more) or failure (due to lower cost).

And it's not like everything is always at full HP at any given time.

The LA can try again several times before it matches the MAX's cost. And if we're talking about an indoor stalemate; if the enemy MAX goes down, the attackers need to move in to interrupt the revive or at least catch the MAX on low HP. Shouldn't be impossible if those pushing in have their own healthy MAX to kick down the door. Tactical grenades also help for breaching.

Therein lies the complaints towards C-4: it's the only resource vs. resource interaction that is almost always 'kill or be killed' on the receiving end. Vehicle vs. vehicle has some time to kill and the engagement doesn't always finish before backing off to repair.

Besides... a MAX that's looking up instead of suppressing the frontline is gonna eat a rocket and/or plenty of bullets. I think it should be the responsibility of the initiator to engage wisely.

Indeed, and too much can also go wrong if the MAX is simply in the wrong place at the wrong time since they're too slow to move out of the blast radius in time (usually). Seems only fair to have something need as much forethought to use as the target does awareness.


Overall, I'm typically interested in lethality reductions and QoL improvements for weapon interactions. Not a fan of the steamroll meta that puts too little forethought into offensive endeavors.

I appreciate the counterpoints. Makes for good brain exercise to drop an idea and see how it stands under criticism.

50 nanites per attempt to weaken a Max unit.
As well, 3 C-4 against a tank, add in C-4 Armor, and well... it ain't ever gonna die.

C-4 is the light assault option, and near suicides the LA, unlike Archer or Rocket fire...
C-4 also is nanites per throw.
So why exactly must it be the most dangerous, most time consuming, shortest ranged, and most costly to just weaken a Max suit.

Like ****.

Instant death, can be intercepted 9/10 times, is near fatal if not lethal in attempting, and is costly as all hell in nanites & time.
The Death only happens for the singular success story.

A tank: Kill it or be Killed by it.

So you want to ensure that the Longer ranged, more durable max, forces LA's to die enough times to have C-4 cost the same as it.
**** that, I'd use a Max or Archer before C-4, I'd die less, and still have my nanites.

Here's a glorious idea.
Dodge the C-4, Kill the LA.
Have an Ally.
Don't stand in door-ways.

All better than tripling the risks of C-4, while reducing the effect of it on basically everything.

You do realize, that in order for C-4 to work, you actually do have some planning to right, and a target happens to fall into it?
C-4 doesn't mystically appear into doorways, nor does it mystically kill if no idiot is standing there.
C-4 doesn't mystically work if the LA is shot dead, in the grand distance to melee range, nor if the LA is killed after dropping the C-4... after all, it needs to detonate which is ******* buggy.

Remove posting rights from idiots.

Imo, Engy is the only class that should have C4.

50 nanites is not much.

And C-4 is not the only thing that can kill a tank from full HP.

You're saying it like C-4's only purpose is to suicide OHK a MAX... It has other uses, and to great effect.

Shouldn't universal lethality have a drawback?

Besides, my original point is that it's too binary. Either the LA fails to no effect or the force multiplier in question is dead. No in-between.

Needs clarification on the scenario. Infantry can take cover from vehicles (usually), and vehicle vs vehicle engagements do not always finish.

Not if you do it right the first time.

If it's an outdoor scenario where it's even noted that the MAX is long range, C-4 is obviously not the best answer.

Yes, and one would hope specializations would be more effective vs a given target than a universal weapon available to 4 classes. Versatility-effectiveness ratio is something to consider.

Also,
C-4 attempts are not always suicide runs, depending on location and target.

Using an Archer in an infantry fight is not a very safe profession in my experience. (Unless you're great with Commissioner headshots I guess)

1. Requires awareness, something a good LA waits out. Hence players' dislike of C-4 deaths.
2. Shouldn't the LA need one too, to distract the intended target? This is the fundamental question I'm asking: which side should bear the burden of teamwork? Should it require 2 players to viably remove a force multiplier, or should it require 2 players to make sure the force multiplier doesn't die to 1 player?
3. Good advice to those that don't know it. To be clear, I'm not someone who thinks all C-4 fairy kills are BS and unjustified. Just that it's too universally effective, especially given the platform (LA).

"Happens to fall into it"? That phrase can only really apply if the LA uses it as a trap or is unable to see whether the intended target is close enough to it, such as dropping it just outside a doorway.

Never implied that it did. Not sure what you mean by this, nor is melee range required to drop C-4.

It might be "buggy" because it allows you to hit the detonator before it's ready, causing oversampling since there's a delay before another attempt. Can't say I've had any issues where it wouldn't detonate for unknown reasons.

50 nanites per attempt to weaken something that can be revived for free, is a lot.
Considering that the C-4 still has to work, to actually weaken, not even kill the thing.

You mean tank mines, that require an Engineer and the tank to run over it?

Your change, makes the C-4 unable to even do the Job when everything goes right, making it an assist not a killer.
"Surprise, Now I have to rely on you not being repaired at all, or auto-repairing for this High Explosive to have any value"
"I managed to drop in on the tank, past Radar, a Top-gunner, and the main-cannon in addition to the moving aspect of target, let me lob three C-4s onto it slowly, and then trigger the detonation animation before any of the second or less TTK hit me in melee range"

From "Ah yes, Standing under a balcony is C-4 heaven, so I should be fine unless I get jumped by C-4, where I'll need a medic & engineer"
to
"Ah yes, C-4 heaven, I'll suffer a scratch if someone manages to land C-4 on me without me murdering them before, during or after - Just have to repair in-between C-4s for Free & all, ain't auto-repair grand"

Good luck getting it right the first time every time.
As well, with your change, getting it right the first time, means setting up an assist kill on a now-very-*******-alert MAX unit.

So to reward lack of attention to flying bricks, vantage points, and ambush spots, we ensure the biggest infantry target needs two to give a ****, a tank needs 3, and the LA is still ****** in either case.
Add in that with 2, the LA will die even if they do it picture perfect, as the **** ain't dead.
No way in hell to survive at all, the time to drop a second brick, is fatal.

The LA had to reach the target, not get spotted, drop the C-4, survive to detonate the C-4, after reaching whatever point they used to launch themselves & find the target.
What does the Max do? Oh right, has to allow the LA to have such a chance, and not manage to kill the LA, avoid the C-4, or be revived which then nulls all the C-4 that did & didn't kill the target.

A Max can survive, and be used long enough & for longer than the time needed to regain nanites.
C-4 can not.
C-4 is a one-shot pony, a Max can kill more, be used for longer, doesn't turn into a constant nanite-drain.
And a Max can be replenished in the Field.

Like, I'm sorry that C-4 can kill things with practical use, has a massive chance of failure, and needs luck, opportunity & prayer to work - And even that (success) usually ends in your death.

What does a Max need? Targets, and people not armed to the teeth to kill it.
To live while using a Max, you need to be bright.

You don't have to be suicidal nearly to use a Max, you do for C-4 half the bloody time.

C-4 unless floating above the Target, is melee.
The higher up you are, the longer the drop takes, which makes it easier to miss, and gives more reaction time.
This is why it is Melee ranged.
Do you see C-4 chucked across rooms? No.
It is dropped.

Yeah, seems like my solution isn't the way then. Not without somehow making C-4 easier to apply.

both LA and infil are classes usualy away from other squads ... infils go in before anyone else to provite intel via spotters or stay at back for sniping and launch recon darts .. LA's are THE frontline unit with their mobilty there is no way a medic or engineer can get to where a LA usualy is to provide support ..
LA's are bassicaly commando's that can scale any basedefense the quickest were HA's are the grunts of every faction
so to answer your question the burden is on the players protecting the force multilplyer in that case being engineers and medics ... both engineers and medics are generaly what keep fights going ... even with eating c4

If you can get more kills with MAX's or MBT's, I think it's more to do with your skill with either of those than with the power of C4.

For example, I have very high stats with C4, all above average. I spend a total of 947175 resources on C4 (that's 12629 C4 thrown, C4 costs 75 nanites). I have 3536 kills and 1688 vehicle kills with those C4. And don't think that's low, check other top player's stats and you'll find similar hit % and kill ratio's per C4.
So per (vehicle and infantry)kill, I've spend 947175/(3536+1688)=181,31 resources per kill on average per C4.

Then on my Lightning, I've died 803 times. Let's assume that estimate didn't count the times that I got out of my Lightning before it got destroyed, and assume that I get out safely 2/3 times. So 803 is only 1/3rd of the times I actually pulled a Lightning, and I've actually pulled 2409 Lightnings total in my carreer, or 843150 resources. Yes this is just a guesstimate but it's the best we can do.
I've killed 5057 infantry and 2247 vehicles in that time. So per (vehicle and infantry)kill I've spend 843150/(5057+2247)=115,45 resources.

Same for Vanguards now but without writing down all the numbers: 113,04 resources per (vehicle and infantry)kill. And again I tripled the death counter to get a guesstimate on how many Vanguards I pulled.

So C4... Not that great per nanite to get kills with. Maybe you should do your own calculations for your own character(s), but C4 is probably not even close to as good as you make it out to be.


Edit: Forgot to add the MAX:
90 resources per (vehicle and infantry) kill.

Personally I find LA to be the great equalizer for when lamers bring MBT to small fights. A quick redeploy and a high altitude C4 drop punishes these fools. Just last night I had to put on the LA gear to school a pair of Prowlers last night. It's amusing to see the perfect situation when Prowlers park next to each other. It only took 2 C4 bricks, one Rocklet clip, and a few rounds from a Tengu to execute the one remaining fleeing Prowler driver.