One Letter, One Number

Discussion in 'PlanetSide 2 Gameplay Discussion' started by YellowJacketXV, Dec 12, 2019.

  1. YellowJacketXV

    I don't think anything disrupts the game and is as seriously overpowered as C4.
    It clears rooms, it destroys vehicles, it kills structures, it is basically and end-all be-all for absolutely everything. The worst part is that if you spend 450 nanites worth of resources on a large tank it is taken out by 150 nanites worth of consumables. Not to mention that unless your vehicle is spec'd out for infantry the best option is to hop out of your ARMORED WAR MACHINE and shoot the enemy with your gun.

    Its completely unfair and makes tanks feel like cardboard.

    And don't even get me started on how strong splash damage is in situations like holding a point or building.

    I only have a few suggestions to make it feel just a bit more fair. C4 must either have reduced damage of improved cost. There's no reason an LA should be able to ambusher onto a vehicle and in virtually a second destroy it. If they can then it needs to -cost-. I'm talking a single brick of C4 should be 150 nanites cost. C4 should be a "use it wisely" vs what feels like a spammable triggered grenade.

    That and honestly the factions should all have their own respective splash damage types. VS is obviously the Lasher type, TR is incendiary, and NC should be good ol fashioned explosives. With other splash damage effects and options, and C4 being more expensiveu, sing C4 as a room cleaned would be less incentivized. That way it fulfills it's job best as an anti-vehicle mechanic than an anti-room mechanic.

    That, and I do feel that tanks should take 80% of their current damage from c4 bricks without the flanker armor. It should be a C4 to soften, then two or three full magazines of rocklet.
  2. Liewec123

    imho c4 is balanced fairly well against tanks,
    any tank that manages to get c4'd wasn't paying attention to their surroundings, like getting too close to buildings/cliffs.
    the only places where you can really get c4'd "out of nowhere" is around biolabs and amp stations with jump pads,
    but its very rare to see LAs running drifters now-a-days, everyone is jumping on the Ambusher train.
    and even if you see someone running drifters, it only seems to be the vets who know about their super power with jump pads.

    also occasionally an LA might waste an ESF and 2 c4 bricks just to gank an MBT,
    sure its annoying, but that idiot just spent 500 nanites to get 1 or 2 kills...

    so yeah, generally i consider it a l2p issue for tanks to get killed by c4, but their are rare exceptions.

    i feel c4 is too weak:
    against harassers, because they're freaking low-cost dune-buggies that take 2 bricks to destroy...
    against Libs, because libs are way too damn tanky to c4 for some reason...THREE bricks...THREE, wtf?

    i feel c4 is too strong:
    against maxes, when will DBG finally do the right thing and take the c4 resistance from Ordnance Armour and make it baseline,
    why is the slowest unit in the game (which is also the most expensive) oneshot by a c4 hurled through a doorway or across a room?
    why even bother giving us 3 suit slot options when C4 makes Ordnance armour MANDATORY?!
    make the c4 resistance default and finally maxes will have 3 suit slot options.

    tl;dr:
    imho C4 is fine vs tanks, UP vs libs and harassers, OP vs maxes.
    • Up x 2
  3. Nubm_again

    I disagree on one point here. If you take LA out of the picture it would take more effort to kill a tank. With C4 that is. There are various ways to get rid of enemy vehicles. The LA with C4 is the most cheesy solution one might think of.

    Or put it like this: Why does everything else takes so long to kill a tank? The answer is quite simple. Its a (combined arms) game (with a command and team play structure) and supposed to be fun. The tank play atm is like this: You stay the hell away from buildings, mountains, trees, cliffs, other large structures. Right in the open, where the libs and harassers roam free. I'd say solo tank play should be possible (to some degree ofc), or at least enjoyable.

    Well, if C4 were removed from the LA, you'd see an increase in flash c4 cheese right away. And tank pilots would complain (more) about wrath flashes.

    Its not the C4 imo, its the fact that LAs can use C4. Its absolutely rare to see a c4 tank kill from any other class than LA, although every class except infil has access to it. LA is the by far easiest class to pull it of. And arguably too easy, with an enormous impact on vehicle gameplay.
    • Up x 1
  4. Scroffel5

    Wraoth C4 cheese is easier to beat than LA c4 cheese. I have yet to die to a Wraith when I am in a tank. I think C4 should have to be manually armed for LA, or every class if C4 is the real issue. That gives you some time to disable it or kill the LA before they take out your sundy. Maybe after you click E on it, it takes 3 seconds to arm signalled by 3 beeps raising in pitch.
  5. Liewec123

    Tbh I wouldn't complain if they removed c4 from LA,
    I do think it'd make bases much harder to defend though, sometimes the only way to take down an enemy sundy is with LA,
    Trying to reach it on foot is a nono.

    There are other solutions too though, like make c4 need to be placed like an infil recon device,
    so it can no longer be hurled across rooms or dropped from far above
    • Up x 2
  6. TRspy007

    Do you use c4 or flanker armor?

    C4 has a delay and is not spamable. Its a high risk - high reward type of tool. Most tanks have flanker armor and it takes 2 bricks and 2 rocklets to kill them. So...not quite sure you researched your point.

    Remove the C4 delay!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  7. Demigan

    C4 is a necessity as long as infantry doesn't have a viable alternative to effectively engage tanks. The biggest problem with C4 stems from it's omniversatility and being the only attack option in the utility slot to choose from.

    The omniversatility is easy. You just split the C4 in an anti-infantry and anti-tank version. You can even divide that in various types of explosives. A timed version with more damage that can be disarmed (or can be destroyed harmlessly by using small-arms). A charge that deals damage over time to burn through vehicles, but again it could be disarmed (meaning the occupants have to get out to disarm it while the LA is still there). A charge that can only be detonated by small-arms after you place them adding a level of skill to detonating them. This adds choices for different scenario's along with strengths (more damage!) balanced by a weaknesses (it takes time to detonate and can be disarmed)

    And C4 being the only attack option in the utility slot is even easier. We should add more powerful resource-costing items in the utility slot. Some class-specific, some universal. Resources (infantry utilities) killing resources (vehicles) is a good start for balancing infantry vs vehicles.
    Non-lethal options like deployable shields (for Medic and maybe Engineer, it fits the Medic more), things that make you harder to see like a long-term smoke generator and a visual disruption field, deployable AMS options for Medic (and remove the Router since it was intended for the Medic but last-minute shoe-horned into the construction system to try and make people use it more), weapons that can nerf opposing vehicles and infantry like their turret turn ratio's etc.
    Lethal options could be anything from high-powered LAW's, grenade launchers, rockets, missiles, deployable mortars+target designator etc. You can divide this in two groups. Group 1 is like C4, you buy it once and keep it through death until you use it. You pay for the ammo use. Group 2 is like a MAX, you buy it once and keep it until you die. You can replenish it for free at ammo packs and the like but have a higher risk, so it would offer more powerful or useful weapons.
    • Up x 2
  8. Nubm_again

    Although you made some good point (i partially agree with) below that line, you've started with an rather odd sentence. There are plenty of options to engage tanks, the problem with c4 is (in my opinion) the cheese option to have a jetpack class with C4.
    [ofc magriders are affected the least so... but lets not open that canguard of worms].

    Tanks do not play that much of a factor against infantry as they used to, due to changes in base design (wallamir everyone?). With combined arms, you already have options to fight back. But why having a single player to get rid of entire columns of vehicles? That makes no sense. Its easy, its cheesy.
    Bases, especially spawn points, should rather be redesigned to actually allow to push out if it is heavily camped. I'd say tanks should be a valid option to do exactly that (and not only magriders *cough). Its dangerous enough to face a swarm of infantry without the permanent LA C4 thread on every elevated spot or jumping from behind cover with a turbo charge.

    I never had problems with c4 in infantry fights, although i agree to the point stated above that it is too strong against max units when thrown through a door with little options to defend against that. Besides the point that it kills everything in the game, as stated by the threat maker and on top of it, it is very easy to use + super cheap in relations to the power. Every grenade has a long fuse time and a warning and frags do not damage tanks or structures. Anti-Vehicle Grenades are limited to the heavy class (unless A.S.P.) and are not even close to the power of C4 in terms of damage, usability and resource cost. And again, c4 is not the problem (imo), its that LAs are allowed to use it.

    If anyone has problems with vehicles, they are probably stuck in the infantry bubble in a combined arms game. Besides the other non-vehicle, non-air options like turrets, tank mines, rocket launcher, rocklet rifle, armor piercing infantry weapons, and the fact that you are probably out of danger unless in the open or certain bases - which are probably designed to be defended against vehicles with everything mentioned above + friendly vehicles or air. Not every base has to be an infantry only fight, that would go against was PS2 is about. There are still bases designed to allow tank shells hit the capture point (more or less), because they are hard to attack with infantry only. I think c4 LAs are well designed in tech plants and towers with outside capture points. But they are not limited to those. And ofc ambusher was one of the biggest middle fingers tank pilots have seen during the years (and there where plenty of those) and not the only buff to the vehicle destruction power of the already #1 tank killer, the c4 LA.

    But again, those are my personal thoughts on the issue.
    • Up x 3
  9. Scroffel5

    Sorry, accidentally clicked like when I was tryna click Reply. C4 isn't high risk - high reward until you drop the c4 brick. If you don't drop it, you are fine, and you can decide if it is a good idea or not. You could drop it and most likely die before detonation or wait for a better time on your next respawn. That is the risk/reward aspect of C4, and you only risk it if you make the wrong decision.
  10. Scroffel5

    LA who have C4 should have to place it or arm it, while every other class' C4 should be changed to not have a delay. They can't close the ground as fast, nor stay alive long enough to use it. We should also have a special utility gun that can damage vehicles, for all classes. Not heavy damage necessarily, but it will be damage. It should work on HEAT mechanics, but if it doesn't work well, change it to ammo. Itll be like a MAX; for that life only.
    • Up x 1
  11. OneShadowWarrior

    C4 took several nerfs and you drain Nanites quickly, it is a high powered explosive. I am fine with it.
  12. LordKrelas

    So in Combined-arms Bubble, a Vehicle is needed by Infantry to kill vehicles.
    And that Vehicle can kill vehicles by itself.
    That vehicle can kill infantry by itself.
    So it's only "Combined-Arms" if Infantry exist, and want to be Cheer-leaders to their local Vehicle against another vehicle.

    Rocket-Launcher, Rocklets: Dodge 1-shot AOE Shells, while the tank can take a dozen rockets, let alone with them repairing.
    The Tank, has endless free repairs, that are incredibly quick to do - Let alone with 2 Engineers.
    These tanks are also faster, while sporting 2 sets of weapons, including AOE shells -- Both of which have further range.

    Turrets are engineer-only, in addition to being near 1-shots, for Vehicles - and sniper-bait.
    And the Tank has endless repair, in addition to near equal range.

    Tank Mines are reactive, and countered-passively by the Tank's implants, or eyes.

    Only VS has AP rounds, that isn't a directive-locked Joke.
    For NC, you need the Godsaw, which needs 6 Aux'ed LMGs to even get, and is Heavy-Assault only.
    In addition, you can empty your entire magazine, for tickles - It only means you just told the Tank where to fire a 1-shot kill.

    Air, do not need Vehicles or Infantry, to kill or survive anything: And have the lowest TTK on enemy targets while holding a high TTK from their target's weapons.

    Vehicles do not need to notice any Infantry, outside of C-4 Users; That is the sole thing they actually are at risk from, in regards to infantry. Every other damage source, they can recover from inside seconds.

    Only Infantry, actually have to care about Both Vehicles & Aircraft, in addition to what Allies are near them.
    You don't ever see a Tank care that it has friendly Assaults, or try to find Allied Engineers.
    You don't ever see an ESF or Liberator, care about allied Ground units, or even talk.
    You see Infantry actually notice Allied Armor, MAXes, and what classes of infantry are around them: As that matters to infantry.

    Until a Tank is on fire, It doesn't care about any Allies, and certainly doesn't care about enemy infantry, past C-4 Fairies.
    When was the last time, an MBT was happy to be "supported" by Infantry? Outside of expecting nearby infantry to all be Engineers, to repair them - Which it barely avoided running over.

    Infantry is a target to Vehicles; Armor notices opposing infantry more than allied infantry.
    How in christ, is this combined arms?
    The Infantry are to rely on vehicles that do everything better, and have no reason to care about their Infantry allies.
    Without C-4, Infantry would pose no practical threat to Vehicles, that already get as close, to slaughter infantry as possible, without even considering Allies nearby, past Friendly tanks.


    Like, what does Infantry serve for Vehicles? Repairs. Something the Tank can do itself.
    Vehicles for Infantry: Killing Vehicles & Infantry - any further reliance on Allied Armor, and we might as well Call a fight lost, the moment There isn't rival Armor.

    Edit: This game is a game of Hard-Counters.
    Air Counter Air & Vehicles & Infantry.
    Vehicles Counter Infantry & Vehicles.
    Infantry Counter Infantry.

    Not one of these is Combined-Arms, as each step eclipses & removes the need for the other,
    Outside of needing a servant to place a flag down on the Hill.
    • Up x 1
  13. TRspy007


    .....so, IN CONCLUSION, C4 is a high risk/high reward weapon, which usually necessitates the support of the rocklet to finish targets. Much more, its 75 nanites per brick mean you can spam it without boost.
  14. Demigan

    There are options, but not very viable one's. It's like small-arms against a Harasser or ESF. Yes it's possible, but it's not going to be very effective in 99% of the cases unless the target is just about burning. With the exception of C4 all infantry wielded AV is too slow to effectively kill tanks unless said tank makes a grave mistake. Infantry needs to expose itself too much to OHK fire, have far shorter effective ranges and are so slow that it's unlikely for infantry AV to kill tanks without support from vehicles or 10x the teamwork and effort that the tank requires to gather resources and murder stuff.

    The "cheese option" is virtually the only way to deliver C4 effectively. Even with jetpacks the only effective way to C4 a tank is to catch it off-guard (or have a dummy who doesn't move when he spots someone carrying C4 coming at them).

    Wallamir was changed to that state because any base where vehicles could fire into it was absolutely dominated by vehicles. So much so that even a mere 3 or 4 tanks could stop entire platoons worth of infantry. Even now vehicles still have enough power that all bases we can still fire into they completely demolish the defenders with little the defenders can do to stop them because again: Infantry AV sucks balls.

    Also "combined arms" is a term you use a few times in your post, but like many you seem to suffer from the common delusion that some kind of rock-paper-scissors method equals combined arms. This is extremely untrue. Combined arms is when multiple arms be it infantry, tanks or aircraft can work together to a single goal, and each part of the arm can fulfill multiple roles.

    Example:
    A scout helicopter spots a target, a slower and more heavily armed helicopter then takes out the target. This isn't true combined arms as it's within the same arm but in reality it does count.
    Now the scout helicopter spots a target, and a tank can take the target out. This is combined arms as the aircraft arm helps the mechanized armor arm to do it's job better than before. Key here is better than before, if the scout heli isn't there the tank isn't helpless or incapable.
    Now a vehicle spots a target and an aircraft is able to take the target out. This is also combined arms.
    You can substitute the spotter with anything, and the thing that takes the target out with anything. But the key here is that they aren't some rock-paper-scissors but they work together. The sum is greater than the whole. Rock-paper-scissors is the opposite of combined arms as it specifically segregates who can attack a target, rather than allow everything to attack a target if they have the loadout but they get stronger at doing so when someone from another arm supports them by spotting, disabling, debuffing, buffing etc.

    Yes bases should definitely be designed to better allow players to push out. But if you are pushing out you are not a target for C4 fairies.

    When does a C4 fairy strike? It's rarely during vehicle combat, as that's far too risky. The target's are constantly moving and aware of their surroundings while it's infantry is usually behind it trying to push forwards as well.
    They C4 a target when it's farming infantry. It's stationary, thinks it's safe, it's infantry isn't behind it to spot and engage other infantry, it's not looking around much and it's almost wholly engrossed in tunnel visioning. C4ring tanks works not because the C4 fairies are some kind of superpowered being, but because of the stance that 99% of the vehicle players take whenever they start farming.

    Also the "turbo charge" must be the Ambusher jets. I've actually yet to see an Ambusher that got me or anyone else because of the jets. The Ambushers are more limiting than the other jets as you have less approaches, and you have a limited range to reach your target while that target has a good chance to simply drive away and take only 1 C4 because you can't keep up with them. You are usually better off with the other jumpjets as you can use more routes to the target and stay unnoticed, which is pretty much 95% of the strategy of C4ring. Don't get spotted (or hunt dummies who forget you the moment you get behind cover).

    There's plenty to do against C4 fairies. The most important one is simply Situational Awareness (SA). If you know the nearest spawn(s) you just need to have the SA to know where the frontlines and your allies are. These routes won't be taken by a C4 fairy, which leaves only a select few routes to take to you. There are multiple area's where an LA will be visible during his trip to you, and if you just look there every now and then you have a high chance of seeing them. And just seeing them means you basically have a kill in your pocket.
    You can also use radars, or place the cheap and very effective Spitfire nearby if you intent to stick around. I've also seen infantry farmers that used the Flanker armor against C4 attacks and that almost immediately makes them nigh invulnerable to such attacks meaning players can waste multiple times the tank's worth in C4 on it without actually destroying it. Otherwise there's this one simple rule to avoid being C4red: Keep moving. Even if you move a little bit you become a harder target. It's not like a C4 fairy teleports to it's location, they have to go around the enemy lines and fight a few small skirmishes with other players to get to you so they can't just try again and again until they succeed. They want to make it count. Moving targets are ignored in favor of people who aren't moving.

    The power of C4 itself isn't that massive. It's AOE isn't supremely large and there's enough time for many targets to simply get out of the way before it detonates. The biggest problem is that there is little downside to taking C4 with you. See a good bunch of infantry targets or a MAX to ambush? Blow it up! See a tank that might as well be holding a neon sign saying "I'm not paying attention at all please C4 me"? C4 it! C4 is a jack-of-all-trades, and if you have to think about what kind of C4 you take with you there's already a lot of hurt mitigated about them.
    And MAX's should be able to survive 1 C4 with say a kwarter of their health left by default. That's more than powerful enough.

    If anyone has a problem with C4 fairies, they are probably stuck in the vehicle bubble in a decidedly not combined-arms game. PS2 isn't combined-arms in the least, as there's practically no way for infantry, tanks and aircraft to truly work together beyond "hey there's two of us shooting the same target now, neat!".

    Every base has to be a fight between infantry, tanks and aircraft all at the same time. Some bases could have a higher focus on one or the other, but in effect all 3 arms should always be represented, and all 3 arms should always be capable. Infantry should be capable of dealing effectively with infantry, vehicles and aircraft. Vehicles should be capable of dealing effectively with infantry, vehicles and aircraft. Aircraft should be capable of dealing effectively with infantry, vehicles and aircraft. Alongside that all 3 arms should have tools to enhance the fighting capabilities of the other arms in some way to actually get, you know, combined arms. This should be the core of PS2. All 3 arms fighting each other effectively in an open world battlefield. Not this pathetic segregation.

    If you've ever read some of my idea's, I've proposed things like AI autocannons for vehicles (to move away from the dumb "AOE=AI" crap we have now) that have a higher elevation range to deal with various targets including C4 fairies. I've also proposed various upgrades and abilities to go to topguns and make them more useful and engaging, and things like various co-ax guns, mortar racks etc to go to vehicles. The key there was that infantry would also get some effective tools to counter the extra firepower. Tanks should be incredibly lethal threats to infantry, but infantry that has brought the tools with them should be just as lethal right back.
    • Up x 3
  15. Nubm_again

    Ofc there is something like a vehicle bubble for some tank pilots. And its not even im,portant unless you accuse me of beeing biased. Which i might to some degree, for a long time you would have a hard time spotting me outside of my tank. However, this allow me to speak from experience, and i've played infantry engi only for most of the past month when i reinstalled the game due to the ridiculous tank nerfs and lack of vehicle vs vehicle options / opportunities / available fights.

    There is one point however which you didn't mention, and its a pretty important one. I said already that infantry can mostly avoid vehicles, depending on the base ofc. And thats it, vehicles do not capture points (with some very few exeptions), they mostly do not interfere in infantry vs infantry fights (again, with some exceptions). Larger sums of vehicles appear only on very few spots and usually at already outpopped and spawn camped bases, were the tanks getting bored to death and drive along with the zergs until they get either contested by another armored crowd or otherwise get destroyed one by one until only a few (usually more experienced) tanks survive. Infantry almost never see organised tank platoons since they do not engage infantry (again, with some very few exceptions on certain bases or to stop progression on lettuce lines).

    Also your perspective is not objective or progression but KD. Its kind of valid from an infantry point of view, and a lot of tank pilots as well, since apart from some situations mentioned above your tank will not matter much in the further progression. And a lot of experienced tank drivers (unless on a different mission) will jump out and help out at the capture point if necessary, well aware that the undefended tank will be destroyed shortly after. It served its purpose and has no use in most situations.

    Also you forgot to mention the archer and crossbow, which also do only tickle armor, but that's enough sometimes. Unless your the only one firing at the target with those weapons in which case it would be considered a bad choice - unless you are picking off damaged / burning tanks, works also with a sniper to kill the repairing engineers.

    Speaking of which, engis with repair tools are defenseless. Think about that.
    Also combined arms (as i understand it) does not necessarily means you need a tank to engage a tank. I mean no harm in asking for air or tank support if you spot a large force of vehicles (each faction has dedicated pilots to be glad to do the job).
    But vehicles can be successfully engaged with infantry only (i'm counting max suits to the vehicles on this one), but do not expect it to work in every single situation. That door swings in both sides too, you do not engage infantry (even with leaving LA out for the moment) in certain scenarios, or else you risk losing your tank immediately.

    Also you downplay the importance of ally tanks imo. Although i see where that impression comes from. But moving those soldiers from one base to another often requires tank backup, and often enough goes unnoticed by infantry. Since good tank pilots will engage in flanking positions to draw attention away from the sundies. And enemy tanks have to react quickly or will get destroyed fast.
    What most infantry players see are vehicles that try to get into bases, rolling over friend or foe alike. Or stand in the open, getting hit first and kill allies in full reverse panic mode. Those are the ones you mentioned, trying to kill (or lets use the correct term here: farm) as much infantry as possible. But can you tell the difference between a cheap farmer, and a splash tank cutting off important reinforcements to help out the actual capture of a base? That is support by definition. And - again - this does not work always in every base at every scenario or situation. And those tanks are prime target for infantry and often the first who gets a bounty put on their head. Well deserved too, i wear those crosshairs with pride. :p
  16. Nubm_again

    Yeah, i agree with most of your comments. We did post (write) at the same time, so please read the text above. Also english isn't my native language so i often struggle with finding the right words.

    Infantry AV options are kinda weak against vehicles, but can pose a viable thread nonetheless. At least to force them to retreat, which might be all that's needed in most situations.
    Since there are different approaches how tanks engage into infantry fights (farm, suppress, push back, etc.) its hard to generalize them. Sometimes you have to stand still and get vurnable to get a right angle at a door / room / spawn point / etc. which pretty much differs from open field combat, especially against other vehicles.

    Also i think the rock-paper-scissors thing can be helpful as a guide, but does not matter that much. Archers can kill MBTs, but the reason its rare to see this things happen is because they are so ineffective. Even though its possible. Vehicles are a very real thread to infantry with every weaponry. On the other hand, C4 applied via LA is by far the most effective tank killer in a lot of situations, but by no means the only one. If everything else is too weak (and i only partly agree here) it would still be difficult to balance those to account for all situations and scenarios. C4 is ofc no factor in open tank vs tank battles and also pretty tricky to use on tanks shelling from a distance. But its pretty strong and widely used in A LOT of other situations against soft and hard targets with noticeable success. I just happen to think that doing the same with a tank is far more difficult and stressful and requires much more skill to pull off. Same goes for any other weapon or explosive (which i have stated are far more limited in terms of use).
  17. Demigan

    There is a reason why bases segregate infantry and tanks for the most part. Tanks are simply far too powerful for infantry to handle. Early in the game tanks were allowed to drive into a lot of bases and capture points were often outside where tanks could drive on top or fire into it. It was a nightmare where only a few vehicles could stop entire squads and platoons with virtually no effort. Even today with the nerfs (and several buffs like making HE not a downside against tanks so you can safely pick it) tanks are simply too powerful to not segregate infantry and tanks.

    The solution as always: Give infantry the tools and firepower to deal with tanks. Then we can open up bases and allow PS2 to be fought as it should with tanks and infantry murdering each other constantly.

    This also has a pacing issue. Attackers get infantry to kill while they wait, so they have an easier time forming and maintaining vehicle columns. The defenders have to organize and pull enough vehicles in as short a time as possible to overcome the vehicular superiority of the attackers (by default if you can place Sunderers you have vehicle superiority). All the while those defenders don't have anything to do and risk getting found out and destroyed before they complete their buildup. It takes more effort, more time, holds higher risks and is less enjoyable to form a counter offensive with vehicles than it is to form vehicle columns for the attackers. Only around places like Quartz Ridge where the distance and little cover between bases do the defenders have the time and enjoyability to pull enough vehicles for a counter.
    If you want vehicle vs vehicle battles then safely and within minutes spawning and organizing a vehicle column should be a key factor. And not just for organized platoons or outfits, but for randoms as well. For example you should be able to create a vehicle queue where if enough players join you can all spawn in one quick conga-line, so players can keep playing until enough players join up and then you get a 10 second redeploy timer before you get dropped into a vehicle at a base over. Alternatively bases have a vehicle assembly area where those experimental vehicle crates we've seen on PTS get dropped alongside the owner, allowing players to spawn en-masse with a large group of players and vehicles and get the fight started.

    Since vehicle's are mostly designed for killing things as their main objective going by KD does make sense. During the attack phase the first phase is using vehicles to get to the opposing base and safely deploy the Sunderers, this is an incredibly important phase that is almost ignored because most bases do not support the distance or terrain to form a good counter offensive. So having the terrain and tools to actually mount a vehicle offensive would already mean a lot for base attacks and such.
    Adding in new objectives to complete for vehicles should also be an important part of the game. For example imagine bases where the capture mechanic is changed to a CTF style thing, and you have to grab a computer core (the flag which could simply be the point which you pick up and take with you) and bring it to an area outside of the base (but still in it's area) to capture it and start the countdown timer. Vehicle's would be key in carrying the flag to the capture area as well as protecting it from destruction or recapture by the defenders.
    • Up x 1
  18. Trigga

    c4 is too universally effective.
    See a cluster of infantry? c4
    See a cluster of tanks? c4
    Want to kill a sundy? c4

    Want to strap it to an ESF for guaranteed hit on the tank / lib you just have to get revenge on for them daring to shoot at you? Go right ahead.
    Want to use exploits to become invisible whilst dropping c4 from LA? No problem.

    C4 should have been split into 2 parts, a shaped charge for AV, and an explosive det-pack for AI.
    Being able to carry the 'answer to everything' in your pocket is nonsense.

    Also: too many people in here talking about balance without taking into account numbers...
    This is not a 1v1 simulator, and shouldnt be treated as such for balance.
    • Up x 1
  19. DirArtillerySupport

    People flying around in jet packs chucking explosives at each other makes this game and us as a whole look stupid.
  20. Demigan

    Did you even read what you just wrote?

    People are flying about.
    Chucking explosives at each other.

    You can make an entire game of awesomeness out of that alone. It doesnt make us look stupid, only the lack of alternatives and its omniversatility are a problem.

Share This Page