[Suggestion] C4 should be removed and replaced with something else, MAX units should be nerfed

Bruh. Infantry manning secondary and tertiary guns/seats in a vehicle is super easy to see as a force multiplier.

Would you suggest that a 1/3 Lib, a 1/3 Harasser, a 1/2 MBT, 1/2 Flash, 1/12 Sundy, 2/12 Gal or a 2/6 Valk is as strong as if any of these vehicles is fully manned? Do they not get much stronger per player added?

This is the basic confusion. Infantry can certainly be a force multiplier in the right context.

U 2. Bai I guess.

Not really.

Five infantry lose to eight infantry, but five MAXes beat eight infantry. The moment anything stronger comes along the numerical advantage is diminished.

As for vehicle seats, gunners are not infantry. They went from infantry to a vehicle just like the driver did. They leave the basic unit to add to a single unit's force. You might even say they multiply the force of an existing force multiplier through increasing the number of damage sources it is able to provide.

He stated it only in the form of justification that because they have more players, they should have it easier and win. But that same fallacy can be used to proclaim the Flash should win from solo Lightnings and MBT's.

A fully crewed MBT should also be able to squash Lightnings in a mere moment. In fact if you put them face to face the Lightning will be squashed almost immediately. Yet the Lightning is capable of standing up to MBT's, this is so much so that the team holding the techplant on Esamir isn't instantly going to have much more gain against it's opposition.
Why would the Lightning be able to stand up to MBT's like that? Well they are smaller, cost less making chain pulling more easy, combine maneuverability and speed and have solid firepower. Sound familiar?
Harassers are even smaller, are much less costly, combine even more maneuverability with (average) speed and also have solid firepower.
The fact that the Lightning can stand up to MBT's proves that all the arguments about how Harassers are easy to kill and should be deleted easily by crewed MBT's is a fallacy. Considering how Lightnings that are slower and bigger on average than Harassers are already able to use the exact same traits as a Harasser to avoid getting pounded to dust we know that the Harasser needs to have the same capabilities but magnified.

Now Inogine proclaims he doesn't know how it was before. Well it was very simple: The Harasser took 3 hits to kill. Now it takes almost exactly 3 hits, but the moment fire suppression comes into play it takes 4 hits. Like with ESF fire suppression is a no-brainer pick that almost every single Harasser uses, almost. Add composit armor at the maximum and it takes juuust a bit more than 4 Lightning AP shots to kill one. In other words it takes 4 shots to put it on fire and then a 5th shot to finish it off.
And I haven't even factored in the option for the Engineer to repair in the back, which for some reason was buffed up as well.

Now let's review that:
Previously it took 3 shots to kill a Harasser. This was good, except for the occasional complaint that every single weapon and vehicle gets regardless of how good or bad it actually is there weren't any people asking for it to be buffed. The Harasser functioned exactly as it's name suggests: It could Harass. It was excellent at damaging enemy vehicles but it took a lot to take down a tank from full health. It is also a perfect vehicle to hunt down damaged vehicles and finish them off. The cheapness, speed, maneuverability and firepower made it perfect for this type of task. It fulfilled it's role, it fit in the game as it should and was expected for it's price and function.

Then it was upgraded, and it became a literal light tank. It can tank just as many Lightning AP shots as the Lighting can... From the front. If the Lightning is attacked in the side it's weaker. Even without composit armor the Harasser is able to take 4 shots, which considering it's faster, smaller and more maneuverable than the Lightning makes it a strong choice. The Harasser also has no weakspots that can be exploited while the Harasser can exploit those of Lightnings and MBT's. And all that for the measely price of 150 nanites or 3 minutes? And on top of that if the fight goes well the Harasser's victims cannot escape it, but if the fight goes badly for the Harasser it stands a good chance of making it out, repairing up and resetting the engagement?
The only real downside the Harasser has compared to a Lightning right now is that you need two people to crew it. Which is both a blessing and a curse.

As a matter of course if two weapons are equal in cost and skill, then the weapon that has no chance to escape should be slated to win more often. This to make sure that the win for the one that can escape is earned, and not a simple matter of persistance by escaping often if it goes badly and winning every time it goes good. Since the Harasser is cheaper the fight should be even more slated into the favor of it's opposition.

The solution: Either put the Harasser back in it's original place where it wasn't a problem to begin with. Where Harassers were doing their job and no one really complained about them (other than that one particular faction uses their Harasser with much more frequency and effect). Or make Harassers more expensive to make sure their cost is equivalent to what you get: A Light Tank.

At it's core everyone suggesting someone tries to improve his own experience. But where I differ is that I base my experience on what should be generally accepted, rather than cater to my own personal playstyle. Everyone playing against the Vanguard hates the Vanguard Shield and feels it's unfair regardless of what the stats say? Allright let's change it or remove it entirely so people don't have that feeling anymore. But instead of a shield the Vanguard needs something new in return.
Everyone hates the way the Magrider moves and fights? Buff it! Give it omnidirectional afterburners, reduce the cooldown on those afterburners, buff it's strafingspeed all the way up so that you move as fast sideways as forwards for all I care. But in return the others need buffs as well to offset the things the Magrider gets.

This is the way it should be. Make it fun, but not just fun for the user. Also make it fun for the one it's used on by offering them things to counter it or their own advantages.

I would like to see so much. Force multipliers on Infantry are very limited, basically you can say that C4 and grenades are force multipliers you can get, with a few mines and other things thrown in. But each category is so limited. C4? No alternatives? Mines? One AV and one AI, but what about a mine that spots enemies and allows enemies to see and follow them through terrain? What about another explosive type that you can place down but that needs to be detonated by weapons fire? What about a large range of resource costing gadgets and tools for the utility slot that can alter the local area? Such as distortion fields that make it harder to see and hit people within the field from range so that vehicles and snipers need to be closer for accurate shots? What about a variety of shield generators that can be used for limited protection against vehicle bombardment and airstrikes by regenerating itself after it tanked several shots? What about nanite costing spawnpoints? What about gadgets that can create fields that debuff enemies so you can slow them down or leech ability energy or something similar? Or gadgets that can buff nearby troops? There are so many possibilities just for infantry, and even more for vehicles.

But I guess we'll be stuck with peek-a-boo fights for vehicles and relatively ridgid and limited loadout choices for our infantry.

In the server I play on you don't see many max units and those that you do see just die. Anti tank mines and C4 are pretty standard anti max killers.. a max dies so easy it's not even worth taking one out. Now I'm coming from a server that's dead but I guess a max crash would involve 10 max units maybe 15? I'm not sure how that works out but I've seen 7-8 once on a stream attacking a point. They seem good counters to zergs in my opinion but then I guess the enemy can also bring in a load so it's 50/50

I don't know where you're getting your info Demi ol' pal, but you're wrong on all accounts. Do show where these mystery buffs came from? That I'm aware, they already lowered the health some age or two ago. It was never buffed afterwards. Fire suppression is kinda a thing across most vehicles. Hate or love it, it's what the devs have kinda left in.

The repair of the engy in the back was nerfed. It was never buffed. Do show me in the patch notes though. Devs have'em situated in their own forum. Feel free to find them for that absolutely absurd claim you think exists.

You also miss out that lightnings are immune to small arms, unlike the harasser. Get enough folks following shots on it and it goes down pretty quick. Lockons are a thing too keeping evasion down to a minimum. Guy in a position that a harasser can't deal with can make operating the area pretty hazardous with lockons... Assuming he's in the right position.

We need to stop playing the nerf game.

EDIT: And yes, I did look for these mystery buff patchnotes. Didn't find'em. Do enlighten. I went back about a year skimming.

Hey whats this?
https://forums.daybreakgames.com/ps...-20-everquest-20th-anniversary-update.251387/

"Harasser
Tank Shell resistance (type 7) from -50 to -20
Engineers in the rumble seat now repair 50% of their normal repair per second value, instead of 30%."

So they take 30% less damage from tankshells and repair faster from the rumble seat. Hey thats exactly what I claimed! Weird! But you claimed I was wrong on all accounts! Huh maybe you arent as trustworthy as all that? You would think someone using the Harasser would notice this pretty big change rather quickly.

I stand corrected. And not really. It didn't make that big a difference to be super noticeable. We're not as gods.

"With MBT and Lightning receiving less damage from the rear now, we've decided to reintroduce some of the vehicle's survivability against those targets. In most cases, this change increases the number of shots to kill for a composite armor Harasser by one, and prevents them from falling into a critical state as they normally would have, without composite armor."

One shell if there's composite armor. Not that big a difference if you're not running it. So you essentially want to force people into one build like folks hate?

But they missed their target.

First off, the extra shot required would already be a far better buff than the higher resistance tanks get for their rear armor. This becomes especially true when you realize that the tank rear armor has just been reset to what it was pre-CAI when the Harasser was also a 3-shot kill. So basically first the Harasser was buffed by giving tanks a lower rear armor, then when the rear armor was reset to its previous values the Harasser got an even better buff as now it could fight tanks from the front as well.

But its not just one extra shot. Its one extra shot with fire suppresion and another shot with composite. And since its standard procedure to start repairing with the upgraded rumble repair it is almost guaranteed to be a 6-shot kill unless the Harasser bungles and drives almost straight for a 2/2 MBT.

This is way too much. The Harasser gets far too much resiliance to start combat with and by the time it is so damaged it needs to pull out the Harasser gets enough resiliance and on-the-move repairs to have a massively good chance of escaping. After which resetting the fight is a simple task.

Harassers perform too well for its cost and its role, they are more light tanks than Harassers. The fact that people actively try to go toe to toe with crewed MBT's is a clear sign of this as well. You wouldnt do that if you didnt think it was worth it.

As for the "force people into one build". How am I doing that? There's still plenty of reason to pick stealth, especially since it can reduce the amount of shots coming your way as you approach. And the funny thing is that before this change stealth WAS the way to go for most Harassers. Yet with the Harasser getting more resiliant that composite started to gain favor due to the massive amount of damage it lets you soak.

I find your opinion invalid and perhaps you should stick to team fortress