[Suggestion] time to increase max c4 resistance?

Agreed completely. Decimator rockets in particular can chunk a MAX, and they are much more common now then they used to be as well.

As for ZOE, my though would be to keep it as is, but modify it so that the 20% increase in damage taken does not also apply to C4 while its active.

That's kind of the point here. Because of C4, ordinance armour becomes almost mandatory, since the C4 resistance it gives automatically makes it the strongest pick, and by a rather large margin. The idea is to remove the C4 resistance from ordinance armour, and make that aspect of it come by default, which removes ordinance armours mandatory status and opens up more build and play-style options as a result.

A MAX is nothing more than flesh and bones wrapped in a thin layer of Armor. A random Infantry soldier in an exoskeleton.
This exoskeleton improves strenght and movements. The random Infantry soldier can carry more powerful AI or AV weapons and can survive / escape / being rep / being revived... and carry the most powerful Infantry weapons.

Maxes are not vehicules. There's no reason why they should get benefits from vehicules' Resits or anything else.

A MAX had to eat C4 and "die"? I wouldn't ask for a buff... I would just ask : "Where were his teammates who didn't spot then kill the C4 guy ? Where were Max's dedicated Engi and Medic ? Where was the Infi who didn't give Radar in order to detect the "mean guy with his brick" ? "

You want to have have extra firepower and go alone in order to farm random Infantry? Ok, but at your own risks.

I'll not even mention that a MAX buff would definitly lead to a MAX spam then most of pple logging off during low pop times.

Just pick up any other random Infantry class, and join the fight for fun ?

the only problem with c4 in its entirety, in every possible arguement that ive seen on the forum, is that it can be thrown.

he ability to THROW C4 is what causes all of the grief, if its changed to a deployable, it can still be lethal and perhaps even more lethal than it is now. But it requires more thought to use, and becomes more situational, rather than the everymans anti-everything omega grenade.

And without being throw-able, it's completely incapable of being used on Vehicle users that aren't AFK.
The throwing against Maxes, makes it easily too effective
The throwing against infantry, with the blast radius, same problem.

Vehicles? Yeah you aren't placing it on the hull, unless the driver is blind, deaf, and an idiot.
It can't be more lethal - when the practicality of actually using it, is limited to door-way traps.
As it wouldn't able to attach to the tanks, which is what it is used for - given every other AV leaves the target so fully in command of their fate, it ain't even funny.

Any vehicle you actually manage to put C4 on will 95% of the time be stationary and completely oblvious to you whether you are flying, running, or swimming. doesnt matter. and I include myself in that stat I have stopped in dumb places and paid for it, but if you are moving it doesnt happen. so that wont make any difference at all.

and it doesnt have to be more lethal, that was just an aside to my actual point. and theres nothing saying that it cant be attached to vehicles still, you just stand next to the vehicle and press mouse 1 with your C4 out. even if the action was instantaneous it would still solve literally all of the problems with c4 overnight.

And placing onto the vehicle, requires them not notice a LA sitting on their hull, able to be stopped by moving.
While currently, the throw isn't as glitchy as placement of objects, and allows C-4 to fall from above -- and not have the LA required to be essentially kissing the hull.
Which gives a bit more freedom, and allows the LA to still be some-what still mobile.

Unlike placement, where they are glued to the hull, and unable to not be a perfect target when they get to the target.
Try to place a tank-mine onto a Tank. Now do it with C-4 throw.
You should see the difference.

As as is demonstrated by playing the game only tanks moving really slowly or not moving at all will be C4'd by LA's anyway. as in people that dont know you are there to begin with. so having to land on the tank, or dropping C4 from however many meters above it makes no difference.

I am confused as to why you are equating my arguement to throwing tank mines. thats not at all what im saying, and tank mines slide right off vehicles if you put them on top. (which is obviously why it would be bad if C4 did the same).

I am saying that C4 should be like the Mana turrets in their deployability, only the action is lightning fast and the c4 can be PLACED onto walls, floors, celings, vehicles etc. you press mouse 1 and your dude does the throw animation, but instead of a c4 flying out of their hand, a C4 appears immediately onto whatever is knife range infront of you and is stuck to that object.

And making C-4 have to use the buggy placement system compounds this.
So it becomes even more simple, due to the system not properly attaching, reducing the range even closer to the tank, and making the LA even more vulnerable while using it.

If it's near identical anyway: why risk making it even more useless, when you can adjust the blast radius & resistances so infantry & maxes aren't as easily scrambled..
Rather than making C-4 even more screwed due to an enforced 1-meter or less placement range rather than the already limited throw.

Throwing tank mines: As you can have to be on top of the target, and then have run them over.
With the same throw as C-4 - expect it doesn't stick.
With placement - Ammo Packs, had issues severely on surfaces - they were changed to throw.
Now, consider how Tank mines & Ammo packs both are throw.
Now consider C-4, having to be placed on vehicles not the ground, having to use Daybreak's placement system..

You get the bloody hint now?
Either it will be more problematic, buggy, similar..
Just adapt the blast radius or how damage is handled, not make it even more easy to be scrambled.

This is sorta true. Against armour, C4 is overall where it should be in my opinion ( and I say this as a frequent tank user). Its against MAX suits and to a lesser extent, infantry, that the real problem exists.

That being said, LA is not exactly vulnerable when trying to C4 a tank considering that,
A: Your a small target compared to vehicles, and a heck of a lot more agile.
B: You can fly above the max elevation range for the main cannon, and numerous secondaries rather easily.

LA is only vulnerable against tanks if that tank has adequate, and aware infantry support ( which is kinda rare), the tank crew are skilled at situational awareness, or the LA does something dumb.

Dont know about you but ive never had something I deployed onto the ground fall over, or slide away, or fly away randomly like anti infantry mines.

You mean making the LA actually vulnerable while using it, killing unaware people is not a high risk activity.

More useless than ubiquitous is still pretty useful? and reducing the blast radius down is dumb, its supposed to be a really big bomb, the problem is that really big bombs that can be thrown like grenades are abundantly clear oversights in balace that cause everything else to have to be different than if the really big throwing bomb was just a really bomb. Its still a really big bomb.

so now you're trying to say that the C-4 has a limited range when your main arguement has been dropping C4 from above, in which the range is infinite? you dont get to have it both ways.

This is all meaningless as C4 currently already sticks to objects just fine, the only difference would be that the c4 doesnt fly out of your hand and that you need to be standing next to and facing something to use the C4, it would stick to things just as it does now.

No because your arguements are abysmal.

An LA during flight is an easy target, an LA during travel is an easy target, an LA using C-4 right now is an easy kill.
A LA having to manually attach C-4 to a target, just ensures that LA is dead to rights.

If you want to solve the C-4 universal grenade issue, you solve it with blast radius & damage resistances.
You don't make it even less capable of use.

but it's only the most powerful Anti infantry weapons for the NC MAX. where they get a 200rpm Pump action shotgun VS and TR just get an LMG with ALS.
The only benefit you get there is 10k HP against small arms in exchange for movement speed, but you still keep the effective HP of 1 against C4 as normal infantry.
And the issue of low pop MAX spam already is a thing. and they all take 2 bricks of C4 to kill because all those NC MAXes run Flak armor. so where a buff to base resist might result in a MAX surviving with ~25%HP that would still be a nerf to the current version when they run ballistic and no change if they still run ordinance.

so basically what your saying is you want all risk removed to using a tank.

C4 needs its current blast radius to hit the center point in vehicles. Its damage against most vehicles is also spot on, except for Harassers. The single solution is a C4 resistance to infantry and Maxes.

Wait, old ZOE was the perfect example that sacrificing health in favor of speed was the far far superior option. Also, Heavy Overshield is only good because the other classes don't have something better than the HA to avoid damage in-combat, with the exception of the LA who now has his Ambusher Jet but it's mostly useless in-combat so the extra health of the HA still trumps it. And funny thing, the moment that overshield is taken down the HA becomes just as maneuverable as all the other classes again!

old ZoE took it to the extreme though, you could sidestep faster than sprinting infantry, plus it was always on so you were constantly moving at infantry sprint speed.

maxes cost 450 nanites, they're big lumbering chunks of metal, i think it makes more sense both from a gameplay standpoint and a some-what thematic standpoint if they could simply have the ordnance armour c4 resistance made baseline.
instead of Usain Bolt maxes.
if a dune buggy can eat a brick of c4 and keep going, maxes should too.

I'm not asking to Usain Bolt MAX's, I'm asking to create actual solutions that aren't based on "let's just give them auto-granted resistances", and let's especially not base it on Dune Buggies that shouldn't be able to survive a single brick anyway as that would lead to extreme powercreep.

For example, you could start by splitting C4 into an AV and an AI variant.
You could give MAX's a weaker form of Charge to get away, something like a short burst of the old ZOE speed with a cooldown.
You could give MAX's the ability to activate a temporary field that adds a delay to any explosive in it's field, allowing the MAX the time to get out of the way.
You could add a push-field that pushes all mines and C4 away from the MAX upon activation.
You could add more viable utility options so that C4 won't be the only choice, more choices means less people carry C4 and less people are able to kill you.

Also the argument "but lots of things can damage/kill me" is mute. Ofcourse lots of things can damage kill you! The game starts breaking at the seams the moment you can't. Aircraft for example are in all practicality immune to most weapons and are pretty OP, only kept in "check" because the A2A system is completely warped.

This is priority one for the next update. Maxes need to be able to take at least one c4 before they die. As of now, maxes are pretty much worthless when asked to do what their role calls for, which is pushing into a crowded room and clearing it out and getting friendlies through chokepoints. This would help alleviate stagnate battle flow at certain bases.

I am in for increasing the activation time again.
This would give MAX units the time needed to kill rushing LAs or move outside the deadly blast radius. Still C4 would be deadly as it is now, just not as cheesy...

Isn't that what tunnel vision is for?

In the situations where people would normally take C-4, the only option that people would forgo taking C-4 for is a better C-4.