[Suggestion] Nerfing C4 without making infantry harmless against tanks

This suggestion goal is to nerf C4 effectiveness against most targets so it won't be able to be used as a anti-everything grenade. This nerf should allow vehicles to go INSIDE bases to support infantry.

C4 is reworked in a dedicated anti-construction tool. It's still a good weapon against non-construction target, but only while set as a trap. Dying to C4 should be more fair now.

Infantry got a few buff against vehicle and MAX so they won't be out of control.
All infantry (even infiltrator) have access to more anti-vehicle options : AV grenade and tankmines are available to all class, and AP bullet attachment is available to all non-NS Pistols.
The latter should make ES pistol more popular while increasing infantry effectiveness against heavy-armor (the drawback of AP bullet is you're not using commissioner/underboss).
Tank mines are also improved and more resistant to ensure they'll slow enemy more effectively, even enemy with minesweeper, as an interesting side effect it make them harder to detonate them manually.
Finally, MAX, Vehicle and airplanes reparations while in combat are less effective.


C4 rework, details :

• Nanite cost is reduced to 50
• Quantity is increased to 2/3 at rank 1/2
• Infiltrator can use C4
• If you respawn, C4 no longer disapear
• Now have a 4 sec arming time and 100% resistance to friendly fire during that arming time
• It show a "frag grenade" visual warning to everyone within 5m as long as it's not stick to something
• Damage against MAX, light armor, heavy armor and airplane are standardized
  • MAX have 0% resistance against C4 (1250 damage, down to 1000 with ordnance armor)
  • Flash, harasser, ESF and Valkyrie have -60% resistance to C4 (2000 damage)
  • Lightning, MBT, Sunderer, Ant, Liberator and Galaxy have 20% resistance to C4 (1000 damage)
  • Damage against phalanx turret and construction are unchanged
• Flanker armor could be reworked to give extra health instead of C4 resistance.

Combat repair nerf, details

• When a MAX, vehicle or airplane take damage, all reparations are only 50% effective, down to 30% for harasser and valkyrie
• Harasser and valkyrie rumble seat now repair at normal rate
• Duration is 2 sec for Kinetic damages and 8 sec for ordnance damages (these damage types are listed in MAX's optional suits armor)

AP bullet attachment, details

• Change damage type to HMG
• Reduce projectile lifespawn to 0,3 sec (~90-120m max range)
• Godsaw now have HVA+AP bullet but lose it's secondary fire mode (200m max range)

Tankmine buff, details

• Available to all non-MAX class
• Tankmines are more resistant to damage
  • Resistance values are now the same as Flash
  • HP increased to 1000 (if you want to calculate, flash have 1500 health)
• To help player to placer their mine more accurately, a 3,5m radius circle emanate from the tankmine. Mine placed inside that radius will be detonated by the tankmines.
• Player now receive a notification (K menu) when one of their tankmine is destroyed or hit/kill something.

In most games, one would expect players to rise to the level of the game, not beg to have the game sink to their level.

I have to disagree.

• Infiltrators shouldn't get C4.
• C4 is really only OP with combined with Ambusher.
• Vehicles shouldn't be in the mix with infantry in cqb, that's where infantry should dominate.

I propose either...

• Nanite-based missiles
• A Damage falloff for missiles. Letting them wreck up close but not dominate at range.

C4 is daft and has been daft from beta - it's the answer to all questions. Combined with Ambushers it's a scrubFarmer's wet dream. I have only recently started using it as I have pretty much Aux'ed all kinds of mine.

Though I did just have a sweet moment thanks to the stuff. If there's one thing I hate, it's scrubs in scrubmobiles zipping around and wrecking everything that is on its own with one of the OP cannons. It's worse if said scrub thinks it's funny to spam their comedy 'laughing' horn during said scrubbery. I was in my ANT and got chased pretty much halfway across the map when it became clear that these fekkers were not gonna quit so I put a clip of my Kobalt into them. As they moved in to exploit my firing angle, I jumped out and C4'd them both to death. That's almost as good as cloaking and then ramming the bastards head on at full speed

I think some simple changes could make C4 less of a PITA. A fuse would do wonders - it wouldn't matter if it was on a tank or a max because they couldn't get away from it anyhow. Also, a subtle noise when the brick attaches to some armour.

Comepletely agreed m8... this bloody mabushers

I like the concept but not the execution.

I think C4 just needs a splash range reduction so it can't instantly kill everything and everyone it lands close to. Much less effective against groups and solo infantry while still retaining effectiveness against tanks and MAXes provided the C4 can land close enough. Preferably on top of a vehicle or within 2m of a MAX.

Don't like the idea for AV damage modes on ES sidearms. First of all, what about the weird ones like the Magscatter and AMP? Secondly, AV damage on a low damage, low magazine pistol sounds pointless against armour. Thirdly, the AV damage mode should be removed from the Spiker and left alone to be unique on the GODSAW.

And speaking of the GODSAW, don't nerf the already weak AV mode. About the only thing it can do well it deal small amounts of damage over long range, well past the effective range of a rocket launcher. Within 200 PS2-meters it'd be mostly suicidal against anything but passing air.

I really doubt nerfing C4 would ever bring more vehicles in closer to bases. Most tanks are more than happy to sit well away from the fight as is and aren't suddenly going to charge in because they can't be instakilled for not paying any attention way off on a hill somewhere.

To be fair, they did generally pull in much closer to bases before C-4 was fixed for its post-Beta inconsistent damage.

If C4 was a shaped charge i.e. the explosive force is all downwards, then it would wreck any vehicle or max it was placed on top of (or stuck to the side of) but the force of the explosion would not be widespread enough to function like a super 'nade maybe?

I'll be blunt here. Like many others, while I do like the basic idea of changing C4 a bit, I also believe it only needs at most minor changes.

Right now, my main issues are that its essentially a grenade on steroids, and the fact that it basically forces MAX suits to only ever use flak armour, and be stingy with the usage of abilities.

In short, I think the changes that are needed are likely a blast radius nerf ( And it doesn't actually need to be reduced by much), and granting the TR MAX ability of lock down a C4 resistance buff while its in use.

These are the only changes that I think would ever actually be needed to ensure C4 remains balanced without being overly frustrating to fight against.

Also, the idea of adding something that increases tank HP total ( as was proposed with the change to flanker armour in the initial post) is a really, really bad idea. Literally no one would ever use any other defense slot item on a tank. It's part of the reason they removed the reinforced armour moduals from the game, because in 90% of cases, they were the best pick. Even in those 10% cases where they weren't the best, they were still a very competitive option. Its the same reason they reworked infantry nanoweave armour to not give raw health.

As for the vehicle repair proposals, again, I see them as unnecessary and just nerfing vehicles unnecessarily. Combat repairing is there for the simple reason of the fact that it keeps units in fights, instead of constantly having to spend resources on replacements or retreat when they need to stand and fight. And yeah, I know repair tanking exists, but that's also why blast damage exists on most vehicle weapons as a direct counter.

As for AP bullets, again, an instant mandatory attachment for every faction. Plus, it would also mean pistols like the desperado and inquisitor would basically become infantry carried Vulcan rotaries. Three infantry with pistols would now be able to beat any tank on their own. That is kinda ridiculous, especially cause it would now mean that no tank would ever bother to come close to a facility.

Plus, I mean, rockets exist already for infantry.

Implication there being that the old Gatekeeper or Lancer or ( insert whatever ) was absolutely fine and people should just "get gud".

Sorry, but that isn't how most, if not all, competitive multiplayer games work, as it would mean devs are infallible.

Maybe maybe not. Nubs will always drive up too close.

But now with CAI favouring HE, nerfing launchers and buffing side armour tanks should try to avoid exposing their rear to infantry as much as possible while not suffering in any way to hang back. Without the ability to C4 them, there just wouldn't be any real infantry-based threats at longer ranges.

That, and the l33t MLG Pro farmers don't like to take risks of any kind.

I admit to really disliking the HESH changes, very badly thought out IMO.

I also believe the issue of tanks shelling spawns is a failure of base design and should be addressed as such.

But I also believe that LA's with c4 should not be the answer to all problems when faced with armour. Its bad design and contrary to the notion of infantry having specialization.

That would balance it in infantry fights, but there would be problems with vehicles then. Vehicles only take damage from C4 at their center point, and C4 on the nose of a tank or sundy might not cause damage at all if we reduce the range. Given that, it might be more appropriate to give infantry and maxes a base resistance to keep them from being 1-hit. Maybe let it only deal 600 or 700 to infantry.

Oh, hmm. Forgot about that.

I think the best way to do it would be to reduce the damage to the 600-700ish range, then reduce resistance/increase damage received for vehicles like the CAI did with launchers, maybe.

I guess the method doesn't really matter too much so long as the desired result is achieved.

It's certainly a good idea to reduce the lethality of C4 against infantry without impacting its effectiveness against vehicles/constructions (and MAX ?).
But honestly, I prefer my idea (C4 can't be detonated during its 3 sec arming time) as it completely remove the cheesy part of the "grenade on steroids" without removing its lethality against infantry.

You summarize well the problem with C4 against vehicle : it's so powerful that tank fear it even from long range.

I think if a composite armor was added for tanks, it won't necessarily be the go to. It will probably for on part with stealth. NAR might be less used and Mineguard won't be used at all (but it's already the case).
Unlike for the HP nanoweave armor, tank composite armor can have hidden vulnerability to C4 / tankmine to compensate for the HP buff.

How good is a "insert whatever" if it cannot engage its intended target?

In case you forgot, GK could decimate beyond render range, meaning the ability to engage was completely one-sided. Lancer had similar issues with damage and accuracy. How about lolpods or old ppa or how thermal used to work? Should people have just risen to as you insinuated? Or is it possible they were overtuned in their intended use?

@Frozen : Forget my top post : 30min edit limit.

I think if a composite armor was added for tanks, it won't necessarily be the go to. I think it will probably be something like composite = stealth > NAR >>>>>> mineguard.
Devs changed HP nanoweave armor because it increased their survivability against all threat and making flak armor irrelevant. Unlike for infantry, you can add a hidden vulnerability to composite armor against C4 and tankmine so the extra HP won't change their survivability to this kind of threat, and it won't overshadow mineguard against mines.
Also, devs removed the reinforced armor because they considered they're now built-in (CAI made tank more resistant to non-C4 damage). Link

For the AP bullet, the idea was to made a sort-of poor RL (long exposure time with low damage) available to all class, especially new player, while reducing the domination of commissioner/underboss by making ES pistol more versatile. The DPM was close to 33% of a basilisk at 10m and close to 25% of a basilisk past 50m. (tested with NC default pistol)
But yeah, a 1 pocket basilisk per 4 auraxis soldier isn't a balanced idea.

Now about C4. What you wish is basically to make it less lethal against infantry and (anchored) MAX while reducing effectiveness of C4 fairy against vehicle ?
That's basically what my idea do, except for the vehicle part where it increase their survavibility against C4 itself instead of C4 fairy.
Then what about making C4 a 3 brick-kill against lightning/MBT and add a specific sound while it stick to a target ? With this changes it will be hard to put more than 2 C4 for ambusher-jet LA.

Just make it so that C4 has to be placed with E, even if the placement time was 0.05 seconds, that would completely remove their being used as super grenades.

I'd personally really like to remove the super-grenade aspect of it, but I'm not really sure a 3 second arming-time would really do it. That's sort of just a fuse almost. I suppose if it could be shot and destroyed without exploding within that 3 seconds it could work for most uses.

Stealth, flight, and high explosives can solve any problem.