Because it's now in line with the Fracture TTK Fractures now take 5 bullets to kill an infantry Vortex takes 6 bullets to kill an infantry (before you say anything, ZOE doesn't increase the damage enough, it stays 6 no matter what) which comes to roughly the same TTK, with the Fractures winning with Lockdown (not that anyone will run it) and Vortex having the option to 'one' shot kill infantry with the charge up mechanic.
I want Ravens to still kill when its a ***** to kill with them in the first place in comparison to point an shoot weapons.
Why are you people happy that dumbfire's can't one shot people any more? I get killed by dumbfires even less than I get killed by being run over by a vehicle. The UBGL change I can agree with because they are significantly more effective than the dumbfires as well as engy's are the normal carriers of them which means they can have an unlimited supply of grenades. HA's have a few rockets and that's IT, no extras (without giving up Flak, NW, or ASC for that rocket pouch). Using a rocket to kill someone is not something you do unless you are 1v1. UBGL you use to terrorize people because it'll kill if it blows up right next to the guy. Rockets barely do any damage already, unless you hit the person directly.
Flak Armor's direct hit damage reduction doesn't affect Tank Shells anyway, so people shall still be killed in one shot.
One question about MAX AV weapon changes: Currently, dual Comets can oneshot Infantry without flak or Nanoweave, excluding point blank. How much is it reduced? I'm fine with that ability going the way of the dodo, but if it can still be done with ZOE, that plague on creative people everywhere, I'd be aggravated.
The fact that they made the flake armor actually have a purpose now and buff infantry against AV, they should not nurf any AV weapons against infantry as well especially the maxes.
I'm struggling to understand why the flack armor AND a nerf to direct damage for AV weapons is necessary. You are already cutting them in half with the much needed flack armor adjustment. I am honestly confused why MAX's turrets (that cost resources and have ammo) are in need of a drastic fix but mana AV turrets that are infinite in every sense of the word are not. It is incredibly odd to me that the AV weapon most reasonably likely to have mild AI capabilities (mounted on an infantry frame) is the sole recipient of these new, arbitrary multipliers. HA Rockets, C4 lobbing, proxy mine tossing, and AV turrets are all easier and feel cheaper on the recieving end than getting shot down by a MAX that actually needed good aim. Flack Armor needed fixed, but the nerf on top of that should be deeply reconsidered. Magic multipliers makes the game Rock-Paper-Scissors and severely reduces the impact of skill. I just left a bad game that went down that road in a serious way. PS2 is not there after such a change, but I disapprove of the direction.
Well you heard it here first folks Noc65 doesn't approve, that means we cannot go through with this change. After all, what he says goes...............quit being full of yourself.
Anti-intellectualism run that deep for you Moon? I have concerns, and stated reasons for those concerns, and all you have to say is "hur dur having questions = stupid".
If Tanks and other vehicles had a Coaxial Machine Gun (or Coaxial Shotgun) that they could switch to for shooting at infantry or as a last ditch weapon for when they run out of main gun ammo, most of this discussion on main gun blast radius and damage towards infantry wouldn't be happening.
I kind of agree with him on that, besides we can all agree the only Max AV weapons that needed a little nerf against infantry were Fractures and Ravens, the rest was unnecessary.
You know, I've never got behind that notion. It's like saying, "you can't be a hipster if you say you're a hipster" Besides, what makes you think I want to argue with the likes of him? Edit: You're also leaving out the part where he's calling me stupid, more or less.
Idk anything about Hipsters, but basically what I was saying was that it makes you look like a total d*ck when you say something out of the blue like that despite it having nothing to do with what you guys were talking about. From what I could tell, Noc was initially saying that why nerf the Max AV weapons twice (effectively) by both buffing Flak Armor and nerfing Max AV Weapons. If people wanna survive against stuff like Rockets then they can use Flak Armor, otherwise they can't say there was no way they could have survived that. I really don't see the point in nerfing Max AV weapons if they buff flak armor, it gives people a counter if they want it but it doesn't outright nerf Max AV weapons.
It's also anomalous behavior within Planetside 2. AV weapons are balanced typically by being overkill and difficult to land on small targets like infantry. I could understand ammo reductions, reduced headshot multipliers, and other things to highlight the typical mismatch of engaging infantry with AV weapons. Look at it this way. Now Fracture vs Normal: 4 hits to kill Fracture vs Flak: 4 hits to kill Fracture vs Nano: 4 hits to kill Just Flak Change Fracture vs Normal: 4 hits to kill Fracture vs Flak: 7 hits to kill Fracture vs Nano: 4 hits to kill Just Damage Change Fracture vs Normal: 5 hits to kill Fracture vs Flak: 5 hits to kill Fracture vs Nano: 7 hits to kill Both Changes Fracture vs Normal: 5 hits to kill Fracture vs Flak: 10 hits to kill Fracture vs Nano: 7 hits to kill Is this bad balance? I wouldn't say. It does seem rather odd that someone could ignore being shot at in the time it takes to drop a tank mine, back out of blast radius, and shoot it. It also is a good reminder that nanoweave should work like MAX resists, not raw health, however that is for another thread.
