Nurf the C4's power or increase it's cost

Discussion in 'PlanetSide 2 Gameplay Discussion' started by Battlegear2099, Jul 30, 2017.

  1. Battlegear2099

    They Need to make the C4 harder to get and or Cost more certs as it does too much damage for the cost.

    You should not be able to C4 a full undamaged Mag rider Tank with one hit and destroy it needs adjusted.
  2. UberNoob1337101

    Git gud
    • Up x 1
  3. Halkesh


    C4 already need 2 block to destroy a full HP tank.
    If infantry can C4 your tank it's your fault and lack of awareness : even vanguard backpedal is faster than a sprinting infantry. And as a magrider you can turbo away from C4.

    In PS2, tank's goal is to have a bulletproof canon, not to be invicible. You should learn how to drive/place your magrider better to avoid being blow up by C4.
    • Up x 2
  4. Eternaloptimist

    Two C4 will leave a full health tank burning but not dead soon (or is it now already?). Get those fire suppression certs in!
  5. Pelojian

    if C4 is killing you then you are doing something wrong, peroidically looking around and moving about is an effective counter to C4, the more time you spend at one particular spot is more time for a C4 fairy to close the distance towards you.

    if you can also get a good gunner they are an effective counter. (by good i mean someone that pays attention to the directional damage indicator and prioritizes targets based on threat.
    • Up x 1
  6. Cirena

    Tanks will always be destroyed by two bricks, it's Sundies that takes two-and-a-bit to destroy.

    Source: I'm an unrepentant C4 fairy :)
  7. The Rogue Wolf

    You're right. Two C4 should not be able to destroy your tank; it shouldn't even be able to GET on your tank, because you're practicing situational awareness and are spotting that person approaching you, and using that legendary Magrider maneuverability to keep him from getting to you.

    If that C4 does get on your tank, then you have failed and deserve to lose your tank.
    • Up x 7
  8. Liewec123

    i think if you get a vehicle c4'd then you wildly over extended or you were sitting still for longer than you should have,
    i don't think c4 needs a nerf against vehicles, but it needs to deal less damage to maxes (or maxes need more resistance to it)
    • Up x 4
  9. Movoza

    I miss the reasoning why you think that is the case. C4 is one use 150 nanites for a full tank. They need to circumvent all enemies and other security, making sure they aren't spotted so they can attack. They then need to have, in most cases, a stationary tank and 2 seconds or so deploy time at nearly point blank range, with an extra few seconds arming time of the C4. I myself rarely get a C4 on my tank as I know it exists, know the tactics and it barely takes a moment to keep the situational awareness of your environment and tank placement to prevent such attacks, giving you a nice few extra kills from the people who try it.

    So unless there is some good reasoning, I feel a C4 nerf is out of the question.
    • Up x 5
  10. stalkish

    You wont find any support for nerfing the answer to everything.
  11. Demigan

    At it's core, C4 as it is shouldn't exist in the game.
    It's too omniversally useful against infantry, MAX's and ground vehicles (as usual, aircraft get a free pass and two of the aircraft can even survive more C4 than any ground vehicle). There's practically no choice: Do I become a killwhore who wants to stay alive a little longer (where a regen implant works as well), or do I want to have the option to kill a MAX in CQC if it happens, or engage a tank that's foolish enough to approach too close, or use it as a makeshift grenade against large infantry concentrations?

    That said, currently C4 is a necessity. Infantry AV is woefully bad against anything vehicle, with the exception of C4. Heavy rockets? It's practically the only thing in the infantry arsenal that can attack a tank head-on, but it's unlikely to actually kill the vehicle in time before it either kills the user, the tank gets out of effective range (if it didn't start outside of effective range) or simply moves behind cover and is back in no time at all for round two. Heavy rocketlaunchers are the most universally used infantry AV weapon, and they barely show up in the top vehicle killers list. Vehicle players are fond of telling you "that's because no one uses them!", and gladly ignore the fact that just because something can damage them doesn't mean it's actually effective.
    All other infantry weapons are basically indirect weapons. AV turrets require the tank to not be looking in their direction, or it's very tough to actually fire off those shots without getting insta-killed. Rocklets are only useful because C4 is used first and have terrible DPS otherwise. That leaves Tank mines, which the vehicle users themselves throw the msot so they don't complain about it's effectiveness, and C4. C4 requires the player to be unseen during it's delivery or the tank can back up faster and get away or just blow your brains out. It's the only AV weapon used by infantry that can destroy a tank before it gets away (again, not counting AV mines because no one complains and the vehicle users are it's primary user base).
    Until effective infantry AV weapons are introduced, such as utility-based and thus resource costing AV weapons (LAW's, AV grenade launchers etc) and weapons to reduce tank effectiveness (smoke, distortion fields that work for long-range, weapons that debuff some of the tanks statistics), C4 has to stay. We could at best split it up into an AV variant and an AI variant so there's more choice in the matter and it's not as universally useful as an alternative.
    • Up x 7
  12. TR5L4Y3R

    the thing with c4 is though to use it you often need to get into the face of the enemy especialy if you are the attacker .. rarely do people plant c4 in preperation instead it's mostly used reactionary ...
    i wouldn't mind if rocketlaunchers were to cost nanites but buffed for their nanite cost .. maybe same thing with the engineer AV turret as it does with sentryguns ...

    generaly though this had to be done long before and would have been closer to how heavy weapons were limited in PS1 ... i don't think we'll see such a change anytime soon ...
  13. Tankalishious

    I Main vehicles. Getting C4ed means YOU fnucked up by having poor situational awareness. They have to pretty much hug you to kill you. C4 is fine as it is.

    But, I think too many classes have access to it. It should be on LA only imo.
    Medics should have heal centered weight in combat, engis are toolboxes with turrets, mines etc, heavies have RL(should default have more rockets) and LA should be bomb features with C4 and Rocklets.
  14. TR5L4Y3R

    i am rather against leaving the medic totaly naked ..he already is a big target for any other class so he should have some options to survive against armored targets

    C4 on heavy: well he's the anti everything specialist .. if you want to go full offensive AV then yes go

    Engineer is the defensive AV version

    heck i wouldn't be entirely against infil getting AV grenades ... or some sort of antivehicle/antimaxoption ... no c4 for them though ...

    thing is you shouldn't limit a class totaly into a niche .. there should be a degree to how much a class can adapt to situations normaly not in its area of expertise ...
  15. LordKrelas

    The only problem is if there isn't any non-nanite based AV, you have no options for AV if you miss too many times, have too little time to fire, or the enemy is too far away - Or simply takes the damage, repairs, till they starve you of nanites to attempt AV.

    While a vehicle is more than a weapon, it's an entire platform, with heavier weapons, heavier armor, and is a weapon in of itself.
    So nanite-based sure, just ensure there is a non-nanite-based version that is much less, but still available.
    As a vehicle lasts a lot longer, than a limited supply of shells, and has more uses than them.
  16. OldMaster80

    Or you can equip the Scout Radar and keep an eye on the minimap. Or the specific explosive spotter implant. Or wait for the announced anti-c4 item for the defensive slot.

    If your problem is c4 get a specific anti-c4 loadout, do not ask for nerfs.
  17. FLHuk

    How dare you not see the LA bail out of an ESF 300 Feet and single you out of a herd of vehicles!

    /me spouts oft quoted drivel about awareness :D
  18. Demigan

    Yes that's what I mentioned: AV rockets are practically the only infantry AV weapon capable of fighting vehicles from the front. Any other weapon requires stealth and flanking to give the infantry guy any chance of survival.

    I don't think we'll see it change any time soon either. I wouldn't mind having a segregation between current costless infantry AV weapons, which would be weaksauce and barely useable, and resource costing AV weapons. That way anyone will always have something to fall back on... Although it won't exactly guarantee kills.
    • Up x 1
  19. FateJH

    Aren't things like that already mounted on vehicles?

    (Addition: wouldn't those already be mounted on a MAX?)
  20. LordKrelas

    A vehicle is more than a weapon.
    And it isn't going to be as useful in situations where you can't have a Vehicle, but need AV support that isn't incredibly ineffective.

    Maxes, are slow, need support, cost 450 nanites, and are more than simply AV weapons.

    In addition, those are upfront nanite costs.
    The nanite AV could be upfront or per shot, Idk what his particular version is.
    However the 'Vehicles and maxes have nanite AV' is pretty useless given if you had an AV vehicle you would be in an entirely different situation.
    Same with a Max, but entirely different from a vehicle & infantry position.