Is it acceptable to TK.....

When a sunderer is on the second floor of a Tech plant or Amp station when it shouldnt be?

Only if its literaly hurting the fight and you absolutely know you can place a sundy that does 2 times better

In my opinion, there shouldn't be a necessary reason to TK. No matter what. Even if someone TK's you, just redeploy and ignore them if you want to avoid the fight. There are situations a TK is acceptable such as someone tking you, but Tking is never necessary.

It is never acceptable to TK.

Only if you're in AC.

No. You don't want the individual players deciding what the rules should be and making arbitrary decisions. Now if someone intentionally TKs you or is trying to, sure, shoot them right in the face. But if it's something you deem and exploit, just record it and send the complaint to DBG staff.

I dont think i was clear enough

The sunderers are using an exploit to be places where they shouldnt be

Areas that cause a base to be nearly impossibly to cap even after shields are destroyed and you have a large pop advantage

The second floor of a tech plant is the biggest one for this

Is it okay to destroy an allied sunderer thats somewhere that it should not be at

In my personal opinion, getting a Sunderer onto the second floor of a Tech Plant isn't an exploit, just extremely difficult to achieve.

First off that's not an "exploit" by any stretch of the imagination.

Second off, if you have to ask if it's okay to TK, you probably already know it's not.

Friends don't let friends use HE. End their pitiful life.

Azawarau, I understand what you're saying, but I'd like to argue the opposite.

Without an upstairs sunderer, tech plant sieges would be incredibly one sided (in favor of attackers), since the default spawn room for defenders in all tech plants is incredibly easy to spawn camp.
A downstairs sunderer acts very similarly, but is much more vulnerable, especially to C4 fairies. Once the shield drops, the downstairs sundies are almost instantly destroyed. I don't believe that bringing down a shield should grant automatic victory.
Tech plants, in my opinion, are the single most important facility a faction can own, especially on Esamir.

I believe that defenders of any base have a right to spawn close to the point and defend it just like person would defend their house.

You mention large population advantage, but the larger population would win out regardless of where the spawn, so its up to the opposing factions to rally their troops to either beef up their base defense or siege offense.

I would also argue that the 'Nanite Subterranean Analysis' base on Amerish is much much in favor of defenders, even without a sunderer on point. In my opinion, this base is much harder to siege than any other facility in the game, provided the fight is big enough (48v48 +)

Exploit or not, tech plant fights would not be very fun for defenders without that well placed upstairs sunderer.

The things on the ceiling and design suggest sunderers arent supposed to be up there

And the base becomes incredibly difficult to cap with that position

Ive seen the base lost once with the sunderer in that position in a 4 to 1 battle and even then it took alot of fight to reach that sunderer and end it

And no, asking if its ok to TK doesnt mean its wrong. I already had an answer in mmy mind and wanted the opinions of more players

Its not very fun for attackers with it on the second floor

It gives the defenders an incredibly large advantage over attackers that almost cant be overcome except with an incredibly large population advantage

The defenders already have a pathway directly from the spawn room to the tech plant and to shield generators.

You can fit two sunderers inside the main tech plant area (One in the center and one at the edge of the vehicle spawn) and then more support vehicles if youd like it

Also if you control the center you control the top. Max suits firing from that angle,Turrets, LA drops,Snipers, and AA make it difficult for the offense to really push into the tech plant because of this

Larger attacking factions would absolutely win out in most cases but thats not the point. This puts defenders heavily in favor to the point that a realistic push into the base becomes unrealistic. Theres too much of a position advantage

If you think another base favors defenders too much that isnt a defense for sunderers being able to spawn in places that give too heavy an advantage. The base should be changed if a case can be adequately made against it

I dont see a case where the attackers have an advantage in an even fight

If you dont want your sunderers dropped then you have to defend the shields. or defend the sunderer

Unless the Devs have come out and cited game rules that prohibit Sunderers from being there, it's not an exploit.

Is it an exploit for a Light Assault player to get on a roof?

Valid points..
It seems that either situation are on the extreme ends of the possibilities, which are:

• No upstairs sunderer: even if downstairs sunderer, defenders are at disadvantage, attackers can easily destroy it. Once the attackers zerg to the point, the attackers have virtually no chance to push back in form the main spawn room.

• Upstairs sunderer: defenders have large advantage, attackers cannot break in even with population advantage, fight lasts untill attackers are bored or are pushed away

It's quite hard to reach a balanced fight in such situations, since defenders have very high incentive to 'exploit' and hold their tech plant, especially on Esamir.
Alot of bases on Planetside 2 are poorly designed with respect to spawn points and choke points; tech plants are certainly no exception to that.
Going back to your original arguement, I still dont think its justified to TK that upstairs sunderer, because that mean you have single handedly caused your faction to lose the fight. (plus you can get reported for TK, and subsequently suspended)

Thats entirely different

Theres nothing that suggests in the slightest that LA arent supposed to be on a roof

If the Devs come out and say its not an exploit then ill accept it but if it was supposed to be possible it wouldnt take a sunderer squeezing partially underground for up to 10 minutes possibly with other machines pushing it to go through a space that seems to be blocked in a way thats supposed to prevent vehicles from going to the second floor

Dont make bad comparisons anymore

Thats why you have 2 or more sunderers (at least two deployed), Spitfires,spotters, bouncing betties, tank mines, ECT

You have to defend the point while pushing just as the enemy has to. But theyre far more out in the open while doing it

The main time that I would be willing to blow up a Sunderer is if it's in the bottom of a Biolab while defending. The reason is that Biolab defense requires that your forces get to the points and shield gen quickly. When someone parks a Sunderer down below, it splits the defense for those that just try to immediately respawn.

At least on the PS4 this is a problem. Probably because of all the incompetent randoms. It probably wouldn't be THAT bad if most players would just realize that you need to respawn upstairs, or take the teleport. But even at that, you're still taking critical time dealing with that instead of just respawning and going where you need to go.

The bottom level sundie is incredibly important

If the SCU goes down its the last stand

It also keeps other sundies from as easily invading and camping the teleportal to prevent people from running a tank to the sundie caves under the air pads

If the SCU is about to go down, sure, spawn one. But before then it divides the defense.

It's entirely the same.

LA's have jetpacks. Which allow them to get anywhere they can get. There has been no stated restriction on where LA's can use their jetpacks to travel.

Sunderer's have wheels. Which allow them to drive anywhere they can. There has been no stated restriction on where the Sunderer can use it's wheels to drive. Or what obstacles it can and can't get over.

No brainer here. You have no argument. Just accept it was stupid to say "exploit" and move on.