[Suggestion] Light Assault: Versatility, not Gimmickry

I dunno, it sounds like us bending forward and offering our sweet bum to HAs. Not something I'm willing to do. Since when do we base class balance around HA, the most imbalanced thing in the game?

the extra survivability of the health/shield regen and the extra ranged damage make up the loss of 50-95 rpm.

I base class balance around the most common class in infantry play (there are more engineers last I hear but a lot of them are sitting in a vehicle or just sitting in spawn collecting XP off their ammo packs)

A medic with NRD on and a TRV can stand toe to toe with a heavy pretty well, which I find fine personally, but to then give them greater possibility of positional advantage from a jet pack isn't a good idea IMO. Additionally, think of the poor engineer. Face to face they are on equal footing with LA, once you're flying around with more ranged damage and health or shield regen, this is no longer the case. I guess you could follow the age old heavy mantra of "you're a support class, go suck a big bag of ****s!" but this is something we can both agree is poor gameplay.

eliminating the CQC AR's gives more incentive to use the jetpack for positional advantage, as it should be.

Why not ask for tank mine reduction then? they are cheesier to place and use, and get more vehicle kills overall despite half the usage (and being available on just one class rather then 4)

Let's take that to the extreme. Imagine you have a shaped charge that costs you 450 resources to use. You get to your target, after which you need to place it. Placing it takes 4 seconds, during which a soft mechanical sound is heard that can warn an attentive driver. After those 4 seconds of placement the charge is rigged to blow in 30 seconds, in which time an engineer can disarm it.
Would such a weapon still need teamwork? Would that type of weapon still not be able to OHK a tank?

How did you come to that conclusion? How is it a kamikaze zerg? Because you are likely to die after placing it simply because a big boom attracts attention? Or because you are likely spotted and shot at before you reach your target? Isn't that where the whole tactics and balance comes in, meaning that it's tough to pull off unless the tanker and buddies don't pay enough attention/set themselves up for it?

How do you know people redeploy after placement? If you saw them, wouldn't you be hunting them? (or be blown to pieces). Personally, when I placed my C4 and didn't attract attention after detonation, I'm usually in the perfect spot to attack the enemy where they don't expect it. I stab some hostiles in the back, see if an engineer starts repairing nearby, try to take out some medics and generally cause chaos.

There's stupid people in Planetside 2, but there's not people stupid enough to stop looking for an LA once it failed to get to them, not unless you manage to find some cover that links to theirs eventually, or can evade their vision for more than 10 seconds while making them think you ran away.
Dodging shells... if they aim well, you can't dodge, it simply can't be done. The shell travels too fast and if they got you on their sights, you are simply dead. So the entire tactic once spotted would be based on their inability to hit you rather than actual skill from you.

AV grenades are yards longer ranged than C4. Are they "effective" in and of themselves? Of course not. They're not meant to be- they are meant to assist in destroying vehicles, not destroy them. They are a grenade/gadget, therefore, not intended to be the primary AV breadwinner. C4 is too powerful in current form IN COMBINATION with LAs. LAs have the precise tool needed to take C4 beyond the ultra-high risk high reward weapon, into a reliable, medium risk, high reward. The risk for a weapon should match the reward. I do not know of the last time I was C4 killed (or my friends) in any kind of vehicle that was NOT from an LA. The problem is not C4, the problem is LA. And I am not suggesting a downgrade. I am suggesting a reformatting which will fit the class' intended role as a light assault trooper. And I have to disagree, slug shotguns are in no way comparable to BRs. They are semi-automatic big alpha hits, but their MV, accuracy, and drop is so severe you are insane if you are using them beyond 30m, where a BR is highly effective far, far, far beyond that. And BR's are 'bad' because... frankly... people don't know how to use them. I would classify them as slightly underpowered, yes, they could use about a 25-50 damage buff to make them not take 5 rounds to kill someone at their primary engagement ranges. But they're worlds above slug shotguns. Besides that, I don't encounter slug-shotguns on LA's, I encounter SMGs and Carbines, or vanilla ammo shotguns on them. Which fill the short-mid range role for the class nicely. Long range is done by BRs. And removing C4 from all classes except C4... would not affect the role C4 plays in game in any significant degree. Most HA and Engis don't even use it to begin with. Is it a downgrade to the class in terms of soloing vehicles? Yes, absolutely. But it's not making them helpless, it's making them able to support their team mates who are, in their class roles, actually intended to be the premeier AV class. C4 kills being number one killer of vehicles, all time, outperforming all HA weaponry, including ones that count aircraft kills towards their aV tallies- a demographic C4 essentially is worthless against- means that LA is the premier anti-tank class for the infantry in the game. Again- Battle rifles are bad, in my opinion, not really due to their stats, but because they require proper positioning to be effective. They are -excellent- flanking and marksman weapons. I use them as my go-to guns for any open field fighting, and routinely take all comers, even HAs, at a better than 1-1 1-2 exchange ratio. The benefit of adding this weapon to the LA, is they are one of the two classes in game that have exponentially increased flanking potential: They share that with infiltrators, and LAs can get plenty of places infis cannot. I think that, like C4- when paired with the 3d mobility and flanking ability of a jetpack, BRs would actually come into their own element. I know this, because whenever I get a BR on my engi or medic to a position traditionally occupied by a LA- a rooftop or tree or cliffside, and I almost immediately begin killstreaking with the weapon- because enemies cannot touch me back, unless they have very specific loadouts, and/or are infiltrators. And even then, I often come out better than 1-1... which means that the weapon is entirely capable of winning fights that players position themselves properly for- ironically, the exact same need to tailor playstyle that C4 requires to be effective. And another reason for AV grenades being under used, is that HA's have little reason to actually use them: They have rocket launchers -and- C4 access. they do not have a need for the lower damage AV support gadget- they will have died reloading or attempting a C4 rush before they ever bother tossing an AV grenade. So, of course the weapon is under used. It's a single class exclusive, where in that single class, it is the least effective tool in the arsenal for AV work. Make it the only option for the LA, and I bet you'll see a -lot- more use out of them. And it will once again get the LA to become part of the team again. It may have been you, but I think it was someone else who proposed the idea that LA needs more disruptive utlility than it has. I agree entirely, specialized tactical gear like he mentioned might help fill out the role- and a combination of adding utility and versatility to the class could easily offset the loss of a portion of it's currently all-consuming role as a C4 delivery boy, which is undeniably the primary role the class fills- so much so, that people in vehicles target them -over- Heavy Assault players in priority- because the class has become so linked with one gadget. Even the HA is not tied to one gadget- sure, they get rocket launchers, but people also remember them due to their overshields and LMGs. THe class is not defined by -one- role, and only one role. My suggestion is to fix LA, by allowing it to escape the gimmick it currently has become. Thank you for your thoughtful feedback, though I would advise additional weapon-statistics studies, especially into the details of weapons like shotguns (with slugs) and semi-automatic rifles available in game. (Factors like Muzzle Velocity and Projectile Drop, and what differences really mean to the weapon's usability at what ranges) That kind of in depth knowledge would be very helpful to you in your effort to help contribute to the class balance discussion!

As both C4 fairy and tank user I don't see this type of tactic at all. First off I don't see a lot of C4 fairies anyway, and the one's I do see don't charge straight at me, the one's I do see also die just about 100% of the time by my or a friendlies hand. Even when I am C4 fairying myself and I see a friendly C4 fairy they don't charge straight at them. There's already enough HA's who do that and are stopped at the nearest cover.

My experience isn't the final say ofcourse, but for me it's an indication that C4 fairying isn't as straightforwards as "run at them until you succeed". Not to mention that you will be spotted and killed most of the time regardlesss of the class you have

Subjective to subjective, I'm also drawing on the experiences of several dozen other players with more experience than I do, even. And they also have seen this sort of thing. It's not the rule, but it is not an uncommon occurrence. Thanks for your feedback! Long story short, though, I think my suggested changes would be a big step in the right direction for the class. And would certainly encourage me to spend more time playing it than I do already.

Removing CQC ARs from the Medic class is something we can discuss, but the thread is focused on changes to the LA class itself, not other classes. Interesting notion, however. Thanks for all the great feedback and discussion!

You're suggesting taking the statistically most lethal weapon class, combining it with unrivaled mobility, unrivaled survivability in protracted combat (whatever it cannot out heal, it can now escape from), in one package. And you're going to give this class C4? I think that is... a very bad idea. Combat Medics are easily the best anti-infantry class in the game, so long as you don't go face to face with a HA with boosted shields, good recoil control, and full nanoweave. My changes alter a little as possible, while rounding out a class's rough edges. Yours... destroy the class entirely, and buff a class already teetering on the most powerful (just behind HAs in game theory, and even then... the're more flexible AI fighters and supporters), into... essentially what we could all use in exclusion to everything -except- HAs. Engies would have -no change- against a selfhealingARwieldingFlyingC4carrieng death machine. Which would be a horrible balance decision. I'm suggesting giving the LA more options that these other classes already have- AV grenades from HA, and BRs from... everybody except Infis. A noticeable nerf (Losing C4) and two light buffs. I also would want to see maybe considering giving them another option- nanite healing grenades, so they could serve as a pocket medic for combat support- yet another under-used gadget that can be quite useful, if someone had a reason to bother using it. Just a thought.

Good God!

If you knew how to write, this post wouldn't be so idiotic in appearance, and if you knew how to read, this post wouldn't have even made an appearance...

My formatting wasn't the best, I agree. I wrote it in a hurry and while I wasn't all that focused. But do you mind addressing the content of the post not the style? I appreciate your feedback, and would look forward to hearing more of your ideas!!

I have to agree with Iridar, it was announced in OCT that HA shield changes are still planned, but the coder needed to work on them has been tasked with solving server performance issues, and they had to work on the terrible hitching that was driving us all crazy a few months back. HA shield revamp was delayed and pushed back until said coder can finish critical performance related tasks.

I tried to time-stamp it right when hes about to begin disusing the Vanguard Shield and Shield mechanics.

Yes, I imagine as a VS infiltrator yourself, you would know a thing or two about sweet bums

But I'm not really sure that stuff from October is still in the works. One can hope.

The OP must be a troll. You don't seriously go into a class forum and the VERY first thing on your list is the complete removal of something. Seriously?

Now if you'll excuse me, I'll be in the Infiltrators forum "suggesting" they remove stealth altogether and replace it with flashing neon lights in exchange for a 100 HP buff.

Think that will go over well?

A proper anology would have been "going to the infiltrator forum and suggesting that the Infiltrator be removed and stealth+sniper weapons become available on one/all classes"
At no point did the OP say that jumpjets should be changed to christmas lights. But I do disagree, I would rather make the class unique than remove it. The class has only one real unique feature right now, and that's his jumpjet. Giving it more toys is the way to go. Give it teamplay tools, different types of mobility (teleport pack, strafe pack, burster jet), more ways to cause chaos on their enemies (muck up their radar etc), alternatives to C4 rather than the removal (grenade launcher for light AV anyone?), specialized ammo to make the class more unique (bullets that bounce, increase enemy COF when hit, reduce enemy speed when hit, bullets that blow through enemies and hit the one behind, bullets that allow you to track a hit target even when it stealths etc).

Your behavior... is not in keeping with what I would expect from forumside... I will honor your request.

(1) This idea is with both the presumption that C4 loses effectiveness, and that the CQC ARs (GR-22, HV-45, TAR, TRV) get removed. The weapon changes encourages one to play their class properly, rather than try to simply outmuscle heavies as you currently see many lights and medics doing with TARs and GD7Fs. 95% of properly played LA kills aren't dependent on the DPS of the weapon anyway, but rather getting the drop on opponents so there is little reason to keep them besides to give other classes something to complain about.

(2) I haven't seen your changes, and quite honestly don't care, not because I think they are bad, but because I know all player ideas are pipe dreams that the devs would ignore... even if we could agree on something.

(3) Engies would have, indoors, a greater chance than they do against the current medic, as their powerhouse CQC carbines wouldn't be competing with 800+ rpm ARs, and on the ground the jetpack does nothing. Outdoors in a base, where the LA/medic hybrid would have a chance to get the drop on them, 90% of the time there would be no difference between the class and current light assaults, as the battle will still be determined by how well they can take advantage of the element of surprise. it is important to remember that while LA will gain survivability with the merge, engineers will have the more powerful weapon in direct confrontations due to removal of certain ARs, and it is very possible carbines will receive buffs in certain areas due to no longer having to be balanced against the mobility of light assaults.

(4) the change would give all classes a unique weapon, which would be another way the devs could implement balance changes to the classes themselves, additionally what you are suggesting about giving 1 grenade type to 2 classes would break balancing the item. it sucks for medics but rather than buff it they would have to leave medics suffering should it prove to be better on LA, that's the same problem with carbines right now! it's a medic gadget that would be more useful if it didn't suck, my change will have basically LA with healing grenades, but you still wont see them used because revive is just better...