(Long post) Quantitative proof that the rocklet rifle is unbalanced

He said vulnerable.
The more things that can kill it, the more vulnerable it is.
He didn't say weaker sunderer.
But if the notion that it is durable isn't there, IE it is vulnerable, those who pull them will pull more of them even if one is present.
Since they are known to be vulnerable, and they want to ensure they have a spawn point.

That's how you are misinterpreting it.

No-deploy zone prevents numerous sunderers deployed next to each other, preventing ramming, and allowing multiple shield sunderers to have active shields & cloaks active in the same area.
Aka a bastion of heavily shielded Gun turrets, with spawn capability.

You move to a different location.... There isn't one single sundy location.
As well, did you consider why they can't be stacked next to each other?

As well, an undeployed sundy is still useful, it just doesn't launch the shield or cloak bubble out.
It's still a 2-gun transport, with squad-spawn when undeployed - which if repair, or Ammo, still works without a care.

The NDZ was added in the very beginning to prevent easy captures. Without that in some bases attackers would literaly be able to deploy on capture point. Just think of Tech Plants.

Fights would last less than ever, and it's not a speculation: we've already seen it happen.

This really isn't quantitative proof that the rocklet rifle is unbalanced, it's just quantitative proof that the LA is the most effective class at taking out sunderers.

By your logic, why aren't you also bemoaning the imbalance of the dalton? Further, why is cert cost even a factor in balance discussion? Do you really think that more cert-intensive things should be more effective? That's a great way to screw over new players even harder.

HAs are a far superior all-rounder class to LAs. That's demonstrable with rhetoric as much as it is empiricism. Anybody who's played the game enough knows that. Being on top of a ledge does not give the same survivability as an overshield, especially when it comes to critical point-hold situations.

Giving them anti-sunderer capability matches with the fact that their point-hold is bad. LAs are already situational as it is, given the importance of close-range point-hold capacity. So if you want to nerf the rocklet rifle, you'll need to give the LA something else, like some way of contributing to point-hold situations.

And good luck figuring that out. Until then, rocklet rifles are fine. I rarely see them used as it is, especially for a 0 cert cost item. Honestly, C4 is the bigger problem due to its tremendous burst damage, plus being coupled with rocklets (as well as HA launchers and AV nades). The fact that sunderers need more people to defend than they do people to destroy has always been an issue, largely in small-scale fights, but this also goes into other complicated problems like the lack of importance of spawn logistics, redeployside, and the proximity defenders tend to have to capture points.

I like the detailed analysis but why should LA not be the best at killing Sundies?

HA are best at 1 v 1 and storming the cap point, Snipers are best at blowing heads off at 200 metres etc. etc.

Besides which, I find the RR on its own to be a finisher of damaged vehicles or an annoyance rather than a powerful weapon on its own. combined with C4 it is yea good, I grant you but my LA dies a heck of a lot of times trying to work that combo against anything other than an unguarded Sundy.

Agree, but they're killing more MBT's for sure. I've had several narrow escapes (and a couple of deaths) due to LA's dropping C4 then dropping in behind with rocklets. Annoying, but just seems like a good new tactic to me.

Giving the class who already is the best at destroying vehicles another anti vehicle weapon and expecting it to be balanced? Only DBG...

Or people will just pull them even less, like everything UP in the game.

So what are your test results when a LA is using their Rocklet Rifle against a manned Sundy with Kobalts with a few deployed Spitfires?

It's a sundy.
Unlike any other vehicle, you actually need them.

As well, with that Logic, must they be the most durable things by virtue of a lack proper killing method?
One that doesn't require managing to get a vehicle to it, which needs the defense to be morons, lacking, or not have the vehicle pad locally made into a kill zone, while also being incapable of addressing a vehicle coming from the hostile lattice further back.
Which is more likely to also run into the opposing infantry, and vehicles surrounding the base, that aren't near the Sundy target(s)

You want it to live, you Defend it.
It's not "Well I parked it."

First off, I just want to say thanks for the work that you put into this. So many people just say nerf this and/or that without backing it up with information. Flip-side disclaimer: I don't have any factual information presented and I tend to rant off topic. The game is down for Emerald though, so here goes.

Really, if you want to look at the reason why folks don't bring sunderers, you have to look at the whole redeploy structure of the game. Thought Process: Hrm, do I want to grab a sunderer and try to make it to the next base for my guys? Well, I could get robbed by terrain that flips me upside down out of nowhere, I could get spotted by an enemy lib that can destroy me even if my guns are being manned, I could accidentally run over AV mines when trying to escape the multitude of harassers that seem to come out of the wood works only when I choose to get a sundy, I could on and on, etc.. BUT WAIT!!! I can simply hit the redeploy key, wait 10 sec, then hope that some other poor sap has already done this so I don't have to. YES! Lets do that. **Of course this isn't always the case and I can often times get my sundy there with little issue, but in large battle scenarios, it seems to happen quite a bit.**

You chose to redeploy and now continue to next step. You spawn at the sunderer... It's half health, an MBT is blasting it from 300m away and there's nothing that can stop them. Nobody else seems to give a rat's **** that it's getting smashed and you're the only one swapping to engy in attempt to out repair the incoming damage. WTF?!? Somehow you repair the damage... Oh yeah, it was because that under BR 20 guy in no outfit who gives zero fcks about KD wants to use his rocket launcher and blow **** up. He marathon sprints over toward to MBT who is also being driven by a sub 20 guy who doesn't know how much the MBT can withstand, so he decides to bail from a lone rocket that somehow landed. HECK YEAH! Saved that one! Then you get TK'd once you go back to the sundy to swap suits because some idiot has a Rapid Fire macro going and forgets to turn it off. Your welcome, have a nice day.

So anyway, that was completely off the rocklet topic there, but that's what happens when I let my emotions take over my fingers. To reply to the original intended post.. Although a valiant effort, I don't agree with your attempt at a quantitative analysis of LA rocklet effectiveness. Like others have said, fairly short distances make you have to tap fire, and if you are having to tap fire, you're putting yourself in the open. You're squishy compared to everything else on the list. Unless running ammo implant, you most likely aren't going to finish off the sundy, and even more so if an engy (that guy above, usually me) repairs some damage and spots you. When you run typhoon, you're basically giving up the rifles use for anything else. The list goes on and on. There's just too many what if's and perfect situation outcomes provided. We all know this game has a great tendency to show us how wrong numbers on paper can be, especially if only one variable is off or not accounted for.

Oh, I see right here in the Rocklet Rifle patch notes that the Rocklet Rifle is really just a Sunderer HP reduction... or it's not

If everyone in your Kindergarten class goes to the gym, you will also be easier to pop, but it doesn't mean you got any weaker. Stop being so insecure.

The issue with current sunderer is the inconsistency which is a direct result of their durability. When you go to see 1 spawn on the map, there isn't a real sense of urgency as it could be gone in the next 30 seconds or it could last 20+ minutes.

Even with the bass akwards deployment shield still in play, I have noticed way more spawn options in play at any given base since the rocklet rifle was introduced, so what I'm saying is pretty much confirmed.

People wanna get kills, and to do that, they need a spawn. Most are actually more than happy to spend 200 of their infinite and effortlessly generated resources to pull one as long as the vehicle pad is easily accessed and they can get their vehicle to the fight easy enough. Sometimes, spawning at a linked base means running through a maze for the terminal, only to spawn your vehicle at the bottom of a cliff that it takes another 10 minutes to get around to get back in the fight... IDK what the point of the lattice is if they're just gonna connect bases at random...

I'm partial to the removal of no-deploy zones in favor of deployment interference zones, which will prevent a sundy parked in the (current) no deploy zone of another from spawning troops and activating its shield/cloak (if applicable) until the first sundy gets destroyed.

This is my last post on this thread, since I am going camping and will not be responding for days.

The responses can be split mostly into two categories (one of which I agree with):

a) That the LA is not any better than the HA at sunderer destruction.

b) That the LA should be an anti-sunderer class, since it lacks another major role.

About a:
As a player who has pulled and destroyed sunderers every time I have played as far back as I can recall, I contest this; HAs are almost never the ones to destroy my sunderers (the damage pattern gives this away since the RR has short bursts), whereas it is very often an LA. This is one case where it does match the theoretical numbers and I can't honestly concede this point.

About b:
I am totally fine with LAs sunderer busting, but I think that the HA should be equally good. Some responses mentioned that sunderers should be more vulnerable and that providing more methods of destroying them would do this. It is with all of these things in mind that I make the following suggestion:

Suggestion:
Give the HA a specifically anti-sunderer purchasable weapon which is medium-range and high enough damage to destroy a sunderer with the rockets it carries (without a pouch), in about 20-22 seconds, which is a little slower than the engineer. (The current HA needs the rocket pouch suit to even critically damage a sunderer with rockets, regardless of how fast).
This will make them more commonly used for sunderer destruction and make the sunderers more vulnerable, as LordKrelas commented above. It would bring them certainly on par with the LA. It's not a big change, but I reckon more players look through the rocket launchers than at the LA goodies.
If that is agreeable in some way, you will have to post it as an independent suggestion yourselves. If not, let the thread die.

I would like to thank those who responded for doing so in a generally respectful and calm manner. I have not developed traumatic post disorder.

More vulnerable / less durable = weaker, by definition.
Just imagine the same argument being made for MBTs: "We're making them more vulnerable and easier to pop, but it's not a nerf!"
That would be preposterous.

Unless, it specifically raises in damage when impacting a Sunderer, it'd also do the best damage to any target.
In addition, Rocket Launchers are long-medium range.
Rocklets need you to be short-range in most cases; If the HA was just as good at even Medium-range with a single shot weapon, that allows it to use cover without issue..
Your Sunderers would be killed with barely any time or chance to intercept (Pop & shoot), and at a distance.
While also having a Shield, for when interception fire does impact.
Unlike the LA, which just has mobility.


IE that's a lot of issues with heavies being able to destroy a sunderer with the least risk.
The Engineer usually needs to get personal with it.
The LA needs to be in close-quarters generally, and out of any cover.

They aren't rendered weaker by the weapoon's existance, stat wise.
They are simply capable of being destroyed quickly by a singular highly exposed infantry class easily killed.
Due to this, Any idiot with half a brain, wanting to keep a spawn to that fight, is encouraged to bring another.

The same argument:
New AV weapon, requiring Close-quarters, on the most fragile & exposed frame, during the entire shooting process , Making the MBTs easier to Pop by increasing the list of weapons capable of destroying them efficiently.

Sounds Risk vs Reward.
With the MBT still having the advantage unless out-played to kill the new weapon that requires the opponent to be in the literal Kill-zone of the operator's every Gun.

And for sunderers?
Shielded Target, with 2 turrets, AMS system, and the ability to move.
Can be destroyed by a fragile LA capable of being Gunned down by even a Single defender let alone Gun turret.
Let alone AI turret rather than Universal, AV or similar Turret on Sunderer.....
if the LA gets in range, and is given enough time to unload multiple magazines into it.

Not a Nerf to Sunderers.
Buff to LA.

Completely disagree; LA is the best flanking class in the game. It can also reach areas that no other class can.

Although you've "proven" the LA is faster in destroying sunderers, I think you've made it too dramatic. For instance, the "light" designation doesn't need to mean it is a weaker version of the HA. Why would anyone take the LA in that case? The light comes from mobility and flight. The LA excels at this and if used correctly you can close the distance and do more damage than the HA. The HA on the other hand has more survivability and can kill more opponents to reach such goals. In addition, the HA is universally applicable, making it the most chosen class of all. Your certs section doesn't worry me at all. It is relatively low cert costs overall with only 500 difference (try tanks!).

So I think it is as intended. The LA has a few niches that it is better at than the HA. The HA is better at a lot more mainstream stuff than the LA to compensate.

unless you play this game on a potato, this is false,there are very few objects that you cant just jump to the top of.

As for flanking ability, situation dictates that. there are many instances where another class, with the ability to move without fear of radar while having a large AoE radar of its own, will do much better for catching opponents off guard.

LA traverses terrain more conveniently than other classes, making C4 less cumbersome to utilize. A super cumbersome to use tool that amounts to what is essentially a third brick when used to full effect, does not change this.

The reason the rocklet looks so good, statistically, is because most people are too dumb or distracted to look up. This allows the LA to wait in position to snake the sundy kill with a burst of rocklets after the rockets/tanks get it to low enough health. Additionally, people often detonate their C4 first and finish the sundy with a rocklet burst since the rocklet is newer (and far less capable of getting kills with other methods) and people are working on their kills with it. Basically, the stats show that LA allows u to line up the stars for kills with bad weapons, much like VS infiltrators and their auraxium beamers.

That description is fluff, it means nothing really. The Engineer had things like "it's got shields!" in it's description since beta, but we've only recently acquired an actually useable deployable shield.
Originally the LA was supposed to be the standard mainstay class of the game. People started with it when they launched the game for the first time and people would default to it after using a MAX. But the Heavy was just too omniversally useful, which wasn't intended by the developers. But did they fix that? No, they didn't.
LA's were supposed to be the fast attacking troops, and only now do we see in the PTS an ability that actually let's them perform that role. They could easily have given LA's the old Charge ability years ago, but for some reason they refused.

Don't go on the descriptions, don't even go on what's supposed to be an infantry role, try to look at the game as a whole and what would be best for the game. One of the things that would be best is if every infantry class has a more distinct role that can be performed more or less an equal amount compared to the other roles, and the execution thereoff. Infiltrator and LA have a lot of overlap in their roles. They both infiltrate behind enemy lines, they both ambush+sow confusion+sabotage things. But the actual execution is completely different, which is good as it provides variety and better reasons to pick one or the other depending on the situation and role you want to execute. Unfortunately why would you pick one of them when the HA's roles are much more common and it can perform it better most of the time? A Heavy having to stick with a Sunderer for 30 seconds is much more likely to survive and finish the job than an LA that has to stick around 16 seconds, because the HA has more range, better survivability and an LMG that barely runs out of ammo.

On the Sunderer discussion, how about this:
Add a defense-module that allows the Sunderer to be placed within no-deploy zone's (but with a minimum distance so you can't place it on top of another Sunderer). This allows you to place your Sunderer closer to other Sunderers and even closer to what is actually a no-deploy zone, but at the cost of your stealth/shield/blockade module.

If that's not enough of a drawback, you can do things like lock up the guns on top of the Sunderer whenever it's deployed and/or increase the spawntimer whenever the Sunderer is placed within a no-deploy zone to increase it's vulnerability and decrease it's useability. You could also think about things like a more limited range at which you can spawn on top of the Sunderer so it's harder to use as a long-range spawnpoint etc.

Other things that could happen is an improvement to the map so that it's easier to see if a Sunderer is being threatened or not and the potential for players to build small generators on top of key positions to power defenses for the Sunderer... Or keep Sunderers away and power defenses for the defenders.

Also, let's not forget that FS's are being worked on.