AM7-ARCHER is lop-sided and bad, how to fix

Engineers are not an assault class, they are a support and vehicle class, and this weapon fits that role perfectly.

I'd take it if in return basic infantry fire did a lot less to the Harasser. It would let the Harasser be a stronger AI tool, but the infantry could respond if there was too much of a farm.

I feel like long range is the wrong place to use the AMR, outside of maybe dealing with AV MAXes in the field. I want to have a 1x and shadow an ally AI MAX. He'd kill everything, and the moment you come across an enemy MAX a single headshot would basically win the fight for your MAX. It's weird to have a niche CQC, high-skill precision weapon but that precision would also allow you to avoid friendly fire that you get from rockets and C4. I think it may be an interesting play style.

LOL, but you did read it all! You responded to it too!
Contradictions contradictions. First you deny the facts now yourself.

LOL, have fun then!
You can't defend yourself with that thing, it would be foolish, but by all means try all you want!

Personally, I think the weapon is fine as is (for now, pending further testing). However, I don't think it should be a primary weapon. It should be a tertiary weapon that the engy gives up his turret for.

1. Assult? Nobody here ever mentioned anything that would remotely enter that area. You're pulling from a void.
2. A weapon that makes it so they can only really fight maxes does NOT fit that bill. Too much niche is a >bad< thing.

I destroyed a liberator with it during trial. Got the last shot. Same with an ESF and a lightning.

Weapon should have been a replacement for the turret really can't believe people wanted it as a primary weapon.

Ah well.

I'm an engie main, and although the AMR sounds like it would benefit from being dropped into the pistol slot like the crossbow and having it's AV damage buffed, it sounds like an interesting weapon for an engie during large battle with lots of maxes.
Dropping tank mines at a choke point and standing behind the HAs with a 4x scope sniping maxes as they come through the door could be fun.
I love that tank mines pop maxes now, btw.

That's why I have a pistol. What I'm describing I basically can already do with a shotgun Engineer build, except then I use my primary only in tight areas, typically when Infils or LA jump into the allies. Otherwise a lot of turret and pistol use to cover where the primary lacks. Swapping to the AMR to defend myself against infantry in close range would be just as stupid as using the shotgun to shoot back at enemies outside of close range. Niche stuff works very well when you have allies to take care of the other stuff.

I was expecting it to be more like the Rorsch Mk-1 from Battlefield 4 - something that obliterates both light armor and infantry. It only makes sense, right? If it can do that much damage to an armored MAX, then surely it can at least kill non-MAX infantry with one headshot. Oh, but wait. I guess realism and common sense is OP. The fact that they had to work the Archer into the game with a clear nerf towards non-MAX infantry tells me that MAX suits are indeed bad for game balance and should probably go. The Archer makes no sense, but then again when has this game ever been about making sense. I love playing this game and all, but jeesh.

That's fine. Honestly it's equally ridiculous that a HA can carry both a LMG and a rocket launcher.

Specialization is a good thing. It means that you have to rely on your teammates to make up for your gaps. This discourages Ramboism and instead fosters a healthy cooperative team-based gameplay.



Your main problem is that you're trying to use the weapon in a homogenous squad where everyone has the same loadout. Instead you should try having just a few of these in your squad, and everyone else running their usual loadouts. Notice in the above movie the people to the left and right of the AMR operator are still using rifles and carbines and LMGs and such.

Having infantry be effective against only one target type is the same type of balance reasoning that says Lightnings can only run with either an AI or AV weapon... but not both. Why should infantry be even more flexible than vehicles?

Quit complaining about a weapon that already serves a Niche Purpose. Especially on THE class that is specifically designed for them. AI Turrets, AV turrets, AI mines, Tank Mines. They are literally pick your poison situational. Buffing a weapon that gives them bleed over roles is like giving a HA 2 kinds of rocket launchers at the same time. Illogical and pointless. Anyways, even crying to buff a mobile free resource AV tool with a scope and high velocity? Get out of here hahaha.

I haven't gotten into the game yet with the new patch but seems this weapons is hit or miss for a lot of people, same as the A2a tomcats, some people find it powerful others worthless; anyway I don't think tagging it with a T4 AMP wouldn't be a bad idea, you can still weaken infantry with the rifle before they come in range for your pistol to pick them off, like come on people this is Counter Strike kindergarten ****.

OP, Archer kills an MBT with 17 shots (close range) landed in its rear. So a squad of 10 engies can destroy one within 2 seconds.
I'd say it's pretty fair regarding the fact it absolutely was NOT designed to kill tanks.

I can't say Archer is good, but I expected it to be much worse after all these Valkyries and Spitfires.

Working as intended then

Hey buddy, you've overlooked that it replaces your primary weapon as well as point #2. You're ignoring the facts so that you can argue from your safe, false paradigm.

Wasn't it originally supposed to take up the repair tool slot?

I'd be perfectly fine with your added versatility if you had to sacrifice what made an engineer an engineer.

Not if it took up the turret/ ammo slots, you aren't really losing anything by swapping those

ANYTHING BUT THE PRIMARY SLOT!