Answer me this, how is it that a metal capsule with a explosive payload is slower that a SEVERAL TON TANK! To many times have I taken up my Heavy Assault rocket launcher with the basic load out for the nice damage it does and aimed at a tank and watched it simply move out of the rockets way because it had over 10 seconds to figure out what to do. Though i only shot from a FEW FEET AWAY. SO why is it that this small little rocket....Let me make that clear, a ROCKET moves so slow? any one got a good answer as to why the devs blessed us with this slow moving rocket that really doesnt do any damage to a tank? and good answer to quill my thirst for knowledge as to why it is this way would be appreciated.
The default rocket isn't slow, learn to anticipate where the tank is going to move for the next few seconds. If I watch the tank go back & forth, then I usually know which way the tank is moving next, so you lead the tank a bit. It's the same idea when you shoot at someone with a LMG from mid to long range, and you have to lead the shot ahead of the place the person is running towards. And no if you are a few feet away it doesn't take 10 seconds for the rocket to land, stop with the hyperboles & exaggerations. They do nothing to further your cause. Now rocket against a Magrider, VS has it good with a tank that can strafe side by side. Those are harder to hit, and for that I can't help you other than to try to shoot a Magrider from the side or behind. The drivers of Magriders tend to strafe side by side well, but you catch them from the wrong direction, they eat the rockets.
Someone does not like the Magrider's strafing ability. Also it is far less than 10 seconds in any scenario, the rocket dies before 10 seconds.
Rockets are pretty weak. Here are the problems I see with Rocket vs. Tank in this game 1) The big problem is the height of all these tanks, any real tank would be much higher and has a profile that can be hit. All tanks in this game are pretty low. 2) The speed of the rocket, or put differently the speed of the tank compared to the rocket. A stationary tank when shooting can very easily move out the target area while the rocket is in mid-flight. 3) Front armor is ridiculous. Two rockets are enough to take a tank from the rear, but you need 20 to destroy it from the front. To destroy a Sunderer from the side you need 6 rockets, one more than the standard ammo of a heavy assult, ridiculous. 4) The fact that the main gun can rotate 180 degrees and shoot you in the back FASTER than you can reload your second shot. Here are some suggestions to help solve these problems: 1) You need 5 rockets to take a tank from the front. 3 from the side. 2 from the rear. 2) You need 5 rockets to take out a Sunderer from any side. 3) Default rockets have a magnetic head that steer them towards the target, the larger the target the longer the distance that attracts rockets. 4) Make the reload time for tanks and rocket launchers equal. 5) limit gun rotation to 135 degrees from the center, creating a blind corner right at the back. I am very good at shooting rockets by the way, as you can see in this video, and I play mainly a HA and I am BR 20 now, so I have enough experience with rockets to be confident that I have enough experience to say: that rockets are disadvantage against tanks.
There's C4 for a reason, rockets compliment C4. If you really want to take out vehicles well, get yourself two C4's. It only takes 2 C4's and 1 rocket to destroy any Sunderer. Or 2 C4's to destroy a tank from the back. Rockets can be refilled fast if you got an eng's ammo refill so if they make things even easier to destruct by rockets, people will just simply spam rockets like crazy. Why do I bring up C4 in a rocket discussion? Because sometimes shooting a rocket and letting your position known is worse than keeping your position hidden, sneaking around to the tank, and planting C4's without them ever knowing you were there. I hate it when I'm on my way sneaking towards a tank, then someone runs up next to me and shoots a rocket at a tank. Not only is that tank now firing at me, that 1 rocket wouldn't have done jack to the tank other than getting yourself killed. Rockets are great if you shoot at tanks without full health. Rockets are great if you adjust your position to shoot at the tanks from the above, sides, or even better from the back. Tank fronts are supposed to be beefy. Tanks don't need more disadvantage vs infantry, infantry just needs to learn how to utilize all their tools and know when firing a rocket sometime may not be the best idea.
I have the hawk and crow, I mainly use the hawk. Have no problem killing tanks with the hawk, also infantry and Max suits. I don't see a problem with the rockets. If anything they are overpowered because I have a relatively easy time killing tanks when I have cover
One HA with a rocket launcher versus one heavy tank = Tank wins just about every time and that's as it should be... now... you take 4 HA's with rocket launchers versus one heavy tank = Tank loses most of the time... This game is all about teamwork. If you are caught 1-v-1 one as HA against a tank at full health (even a Lightning), you're most likely dead unless you have help... I put 4 decimator rockets into the side of a deployed Sundy last night, and I needed 1 or 2 more to take it completely down... I was on my own with no way to finish it off, and I am fine with that... If I had one more squady with my as HA or Engi (for ammo), it would have been dead... If it was fighting back and/or moving, I would have needed 3-4 HA's at the min to have a decent chance at it... Again... that's the way it should be IMO...
You really need to upgrade from the default weapon. Then only the magrider is really hard. I do find it frustrating that it takes more hits than I have rockets to kill, but as HA you just respawn whereas they have a timer.
I actually have a higher hit % with my ML-7 rocket launcher for my HA then I do with the Grounder MANPAD and that thing locks on. I quit using my anti-air missile because its damage is a joke and it never hits. So I just use the ML7 for everything now. Sure the rocket moves at the pace of dead. But nothing in this game moves at a realistic speed.
Thats sound reasonable to me. Although i dont think it will be done. The OP is certainly exaggerating, but the fact stands that the Rockets DO move very slow. There should really be no way to miss a tank from less than 30m away unless you aim really bad. It gives armored vehicle an amount of survivabilty that is not appropriate given how little limitations are on the number of vehicles a team can field. But generally i could live with the damage and velocity of the rockets IF there weren't even more disadvantages, that make using them such a pain in the ***: -vehicle radars: bad field of view has always been the main disadvantage of tanks in combat.... giving them the position of every infantry man that is in a range to possibly threaten the tank maks them extremely hard to attack -ammo capacity: it makes absolutely no sense, that i sometimes cannot take down a completely unattended sunderer, even when shooting into its back and hitting with every rocket -reload/weapon switch time: now if for some chance i manage to get a tank low, threatening to kill him with my next rocket - all he has to do is to hit E, get and get out there. If he's a decent shooter he often can drop me before i can even switch to my main gun or reload that rocket launcher -glowing rocket path: see vehicle radars, this gives tankers even another way to easily make out possible threats. On top of the fact that they still can q-spot them (i'd like to see q spotting in vehicles limited to other vehicles) -little incentive to kill vehicles: this is maybe the biggest problem - why should i go tank hunting, when i could kill multiple infantry in the same time for a lot more XP? Why should i use 3-4 rockets on a tank, when every one of them could insta-kill a foot soldier? Just to sum it up: i've seen this from both sides. When i go infantry, i usually pick HA. I've brought down tanks, but its really hard unless he is alone (never a good idea as tanker), isnt paying much attention to his surroundings (never a good idea ever) and our team has him outnumbered. On the other hand my most played vehicle is the Magrider. I have not even unlocked the HE cannon or the radar (only upgrades are magburner lvl1 and rival combat ch. lvl1) and i dont have a secondary gunner most of the time. Yet i still find it extremely powerful against infantry in nearly never die to them unless they a really EXCELLENT players or have me heavily outnumbered. While i struggle to get a k/d ration of 1 as a foot soldier, i rarely get less than 5 kills (and often a LOT more) before getting blown up with my tank (most times by air units). PS: regarding the C4: i know its effective. I just dont think the only viable anti tank weapon should be something that you have to cert into, given that there is a class that has the anti vehicle capability in its class description
Teamwork you say? So why doesn't a tank need two players to operate, one to drive and another to shoot, like PlanetSide 1, isn't that the way it should be? Vehicles are over-powered in this game, infantry are under-powered.
Well... If you are in a Vangaurd, Magrider or Prowler, 2 people are better than one... Think bigger... Squads are up to 12 players... Platoons are up to 48 (or 4 full squads).... Even with one squad you could have a small armor squad that could do some good work... 3 heavy tanks (6 players), 3 lightnings (3 players), 1 sundy (3 players all engi + vehicle reload or repair and AMS).... Same goes for inf... Armor should overpower Infantry... If an infantry only squad encounters 2 heavy tanks, they should be worried... I don't see where there is an imbalance...
There's an issue which I feel SoE have totally missed when it comes to infantry v armour in that the reload rate on any infantry weapon is so long that a single engineer can repair the damage faster than it can be done. It actually takes 3 heavy assault to outdamage a single engineer. During that time the vehicle is free to damage the infantry attacking it. If Sony want to fix the infantry inbalance they need to do four things. 1. Reduce the rate of repair. There's no logic to the idea that you can repair anything faster than you can break it. 2. Create permanent or critical damage. Sometimes you break something so badly it cannot be repaired. Sometimes you need specialist equipment. Think of this as the AA coming to your car and needing to tow you because they cannot do a roadside repair. 3. Reduce the efficiency of a damaged vehicle. This is particularly important when it comes to aircraft which can continue to instagib you whilst you reload despite having been hit by two rockets, being on fire, and getting pounded by gunfire. 4. Allow infantry to damage the human element of appropriate vehicles. Plexiglass canopy on that ESF or Liberator? Then why can a Heavy Assault pump round after round into the canopy and they pilot not be phased one bit? Ignore the logic thing if you will. Sure, its a game and there's no need to bring real world logic into a game. However, these changes would rebalance infantry against vehicles, especially those operated by idiots.
