Is C4(in its current state) good for the game?

Or let me rephrase it....

Has C4's design/balance been good for PS2's long term balance?

I don't know but as I've just started playing LA and two of my three avatars now have 2 x bricks each and the other has one I have to say it's a blast for me .

As a newbie at LA I have to say I don't yet find it that easy to survive long enough to blow a tank. then I am usually too far away from resupply to repeat the exercise (until someone obliges by killing me so I can respawn).

I've played infantry for a couple of years without using C4 and I never found it to be too tiresome. I'm much more likely to be killed by a 'nade as they are soooo much more common than C4 on the EU servers.

I can imagine tankers hate having what is in effect a OHK weapon in the hands of infantry but then, I find being hit by a tank is pretty much the same.

This is purely a personal experience thing, no 'science' or 'stats'.

c4 just needs to be removed from light assaults and medics and the blast radius increased slightly and then its good to go

what no dont remove it from light assault. it's kinda a part of the class

C4 is overused because 4 of 6 classes have access to it
nerf it or reduce the classes to two ... preferable to engineer and heavy

Yes and no.

Yes: It has provided infantry with one of the few actual counters to vehicles and things like MAX crashes.

No: It's too omniversal. We need a separate AI variant and AV variant, but with respectively still the same power as they have now against their intended targets.

Some classes also have absolutely no business running around with them.

I mean sure, C4 fairy is one of Light Assault's niches, and it fits the Engineer's "specialty" theme. But on the other hand, medics having access to plastic explosives is nothing short of hilarious and Heavy Assault having them is simply redundant (they already have AV nades and a rocket launcher for their heavy-duty boom-boom needs).

Removing them from those two illogical classes will do little harm to their overall combat effectiveness (I doubt many of them run C4 anyway) and at the same time making C4s a bit more unique than ubiquitous.

Nerf it to the only classes that have alternatives and rarely use it.
Engineer: Who has AV mines available which are cheaper and stronger.
Heavy: Who has a rocketlauncher and more often than not stays at range of vehicles because he can.

C4 isn't overused because it's on 4 out of 6 classes, C4 is overused because it's the only solid answer to vehicles infantry have. It's also got too much added firepower against infantry. The AI and AV power separately is A OK, but the combination of this jack-of-all-trades is what makes the C4 too good. Split that up and you've got a much better choice range and cut down on the omniveral power of the C4.

Hammerlock said: C4 is overused because 4 of 6 classes have access to it
nerf it or reduce the classes to two ... preferable to engineer and heavy



exactly what we need this is accurate

They can only be removed is viable alternatives are added.

The Medic if he loses his C4? What will he do, pick medkits? What for? Unless you have a shield regenerator you aren't going to need it, and even then medkits aren't that useful except for extending a killstreak a little longer.

The Medic can lose his C4, but only on the condition that good alternatives are offered. I vote for giving the Medic access to powerful shields. Pay 75 resources for each shield, place them somewhere and the Medic gets a role as both healer and damage preventer. It gives them an important role in both providing cover for friendlies and allows them to much easier revive the fallen without having to expose themselves too much. The properties of the shields can even increase the amount of teamplay and tactics that both the attackers and defenders can offer, and instantly even boost the usefulness of classes other than the omniversally useful Heavy.

If this were PS1, where everyone could carry a repair tool, and the game was slower paced in general, then pulling vehicles would be a reasonable option against vehicles and C4 would not be needed. As this is PS2, where only one class can use vehicles to counter vehicles, and battles are done, or at least significantly changed, by the time you can redeploy back to another base as an engineer and pull a tank, infantry need a reliable answer to vehicles.

C4 is not only good for the balance of the game, but necessary.

If C4 becomes less accessible, it will effect player's ability to effect the battlefield, and this game will go the way of No Man's Sky for infantry players.

Besides the capability to have in mounted on a flash and it being available after dropping out of an esf or valk, I think it is fine. It serves a good purpose in punishing vehicles that get too close and reckless, and without it, we'd have a situation where something like a 3-5 sundy push straight into a base would be absolutely devastating if it wasn't available to for example the light assault.

That statement is fear mongering.

don't worry, I've got u

Nope.

C4 is not & should not be the "end all,be all", nor should it appear to be for the player base.

Lol. If you remove C4 from LA, remove HA from the game. I'd agree then.

Why do people think heavy having C4 redundant? I use it all the time to burst down shield sundis.

As for why does every single class need it, they simply don't.
Light assault should just be that, light assault, the power to remove vehicles should be kept at niche classes. Medic does not need vehicle removal, infil is the same and so is light assault.
I'd be preferable fine if it was replaced with a mini nade launchet, like ya know, the rocklet rifle. Personally I found that the idea was soundish, but the implementation was flawed. The rifle shouldn't have had so much ammo. Spamming flash like no ones business is bad, however it could be given several types of disruption grenades in the form of free projectiles.
The light assault class should be able to disrupt front and back lines, so let's say this launcher had 6 rounds in it, each type costed differently, decoys are 1 nade, giving light assault a way to get into constructed bases without being mauled by turrets, flash would be 2, however reduced aoe grenades that can constantly disrupt people it's aimed at, forcing harder chokes, and then you have damage, a mini nade that costs 1 and does 334 maxium damage in a .5 radius, again hurting enemies that stay in tight proximity.

While none of these projectiles deal damage to vehicles, they should help light assault be an infantry oriented class.

I already knew you made this topic to pose a statement as a question, your trolling tactics are old.

The fact is without C4 there will only be one class capable of actively fighting against vehicles, and anemically at that. No Man's Sky is a game all about how insignificant you as an individual are, and you mostly step outside of your mundane real life to run around performing mundane tasks so you can vicariously live a mundane life.

That is what infantry devolve into in ANY action game where they are a wholely inferior element, such as the version of planetside you seek to transform this game into.

Well tanks are pretty weak to air, in fact completely defenseless if AP builds are used.
But infantry can sure use C4 as a way to combat vehicles without diminishing the combat value of their class.

So all tanks should get an AA weapon standard?

How about liberators? They deck tanks, should they not deck tanks?

If the game is full of counters and hardplays, why is infantry still versatile enough to both perform it's main role and have the ability to fight vehicles? Plus it's not like infantry are super incredibly weak to vehicles after C4, heavies have their role for vehicle removal, ever take a squad out 300 meters to a tank and spam lockons? They are rather effective.

Point is, infantry lose very little in coordinated play, if you need an infil, you get an infil, if you need to heal, you get medic, if you need to hold a point, get engie or heavy... But if you need to remove a tank, you have the tool to do it right on your belt? That makes no sense what so ever.

Thinking differently then the narrative & calling out problems = Trolling.

10/10

Automatically you assume I want C4 removed from the game....... for some reason.

What in the utter F are you going on about?

I want a Planetside where Infantry,Vehicles & Aircraft are all balanced, not ruled by a plastic explosive nuke factor.