Reduce the Liberator's resistance against C4 already.

Discussion in 'PlanetSide 2 Gameplay Discussion' started by Gundem, Mar 16, 2016.

  1. Gundem

    Anyone who's been on the Forums for a while knows that I am a strong proponent of the Liberator.

    Thus, it might surprise some that I suggest a nerf to the Liberator. But unlike some, I can be reasonable(Hint Hint Wink Wink) when I want to.

    Basically, it's complete ******** that it takes more then a single brick of C4 to down a Liberator. For how rarely a LA can even get to a Liberator alone should invalidate any arguments about game balance. Beyond that, a Liberator that literally hovers in place long enough to get a brick of laggy friendship stuck to it's hull, deserves to die in a humiliating manner.

    Please, let's refrain from delving too deeply into the other aspects of game balance that we could discuss involving the Liberator. If you'd like to make your own thread to talk about how x is y and needs z, be my guest. But this is not that thread. Keep to the C4 and Liberator relationship.
    • Up x 6
  2. FateJH

    I think the relationship between the Liberator and C-4 is fine.

    (breaks from the prescribed protocol; sorry, Gundem)

    It's Infantry's perspective that's out of wack.
    • Up x 1
  3. Gundem

    As much as I agree, I still think it's silly that it takes 2 bricks(Or does 2 only bring them to burning? Don't quite remember) to down a Liberator. And this is coming from a well seasoned Liberator pilot/Gunner, not the biased perspective of some infantryside player.

    In all honesty, it's basically a non-issue in the first place. But I don't see any reason some dev can't take 20 seconds and change some numbers around.
  4. LodeTria

    From full health, 2 bricks brings them to just above burning, so it doesn't even burn to death.
  5. FateJH

    I can. You are basing your suggestion on the relationship between Liberators and Infantry (well, LA's) because of the presumed low frequency in which the two elements currently interact. Part of that, however, is based on that same current level of interaction because of the proficiency of using C-4 against Liberators. If you change their proficiency relationship - going to one brick for one Liberator - you will see the frequency of their interaction change too.

    Following logic observed in other game elements, I'd expect to see LA's going for Liberators with their C-4 more proactively if they know that it only takes one.
  6. Reclaimer77

    I have thousands of hours playing LA.

    The mere notion that the Liberator is something we can actually "go after" is just...mind baffling DUMB. Even for you.
    • Up x 1
  7. FateJH

    Your ability to insult people for every little thing--
    I was actually going to say it's "spectacular" but, on second thought, that one was actually rather weak by comparison.
    • Up x 1
  8. Reclaimer77

    Okay I apologize. I like you and all, but sometimes...

    I mean do you really think if this change was made, a ton of LA's are going to go Lib hunting? I mean there can't be THAT many AFK pilots in the game, right?
  9. Reclaimer77

    This doesn't effect you personally though. I doubt you've ever been C-4'd by LA's, because you aren't a complete noob when you fly a Liberator.

    I agree with your suggestion, but you aren't really suggesting a true Liberator "nerf" here :)

    Personally I think if you get C-4'd in ANY aircraft, the game should uninstall itself.

    Then encrypt your hard drive.
    • Up x 1
  10. Antillie

    The Galaxy is could also use a reduction in C4 resistance. Like the lib it is a non issue most of the time but on those rare occasions where a gal is landed on or hovering a meter above a bio lab pad a LA that manages to get to it and plant two bricks of C4 on it without getting murdered by all the guys spawning out of the gal deserves to be rewarded with a burning gal that can then be finished off by a friend or saved by the other team.
  11. Dirge

    How it should be:

    Gal: 3 heavy smoke, 4 dead (currently 4 heavy smoke)
    Lib: 1 burning, 2 dead (currently 2 to heavy smoke)
    ESF: 1 dead (how it is)
    Valk: 1 dead (how it is)

    It is ridiculous to even suggest that this would have a significant effect on game balance, and it would increase the quality and frequency of epic moments by a LOT. Plus it's actually REALLY easy to implement.
  12. FateJH

    Were you here for the manufactured "rocket primary" fiasco?
    Someone started it with a complaint about Heavy Assault players using just their rocket launchers against players like they would a shotgun and half of the playerbase gets in a tizzy about it being a big deal. No real evidence can be elaborated to indicate that it was too common before the complaint was made. After which fevor started up, however, the statistical frequency of players using their rockets launchers exactly in the way the complaint was lobbied rose, not significantly but still enough to be visible. This lead to more positive reinforcement of the hysteria against the practice, more practice, and so forth.
    The resolution was fairly ambiguous, though it stands as one of the developers' savviest changes.

    In any case, an example where the knowledge of the ability to do something changes the frequency by which people try to do something. Furthermore:
    A further example of people already salivating over the potential. If the pursuit of it is low now because it's not possible, the chance of it happening will certainly change when it becomes a possibility and people begin pursuing it.
    Why would there not be? A Liberator is basically an inverted tank with an extra seat that isn't necessarily occupied, is generally preoccupied in a direction that is not from where the bomber would come, and doesn't have many expectations of an encounter that can devastate them within their reaction time. Like the Galaxy it's also an air vehicle where the pilot can let go of the controls and remain airborn. The third seat wouldn't be far too different from the theoretical person in the tank's secondary on whose back defense against bailures rests anyway.
  13. Demigan

    I don't think that 1 C4 should do the trick, but 2 C4 definitely should.
  14. Savadrin

    If two C4 wrecks a bag of armor on the ground, it should most definitely wreck an airborne bag of armor.

    I'd like to even see it disable the controls if not kill it outright, because the glorious crash scenes would be fantastic.
    • Up x 1
  15. Liewec123

    i don't think its really an issue, how often do you find yourself C4ing Libs? XD
  16. Savadrin

    Probably the same frequency that you find yourself C4'ing... mossies?
    • Up x 2
  17. FateJH

    It's worth pointing out, against my own position, that C-4 is currently a statistical anomaly that does not appear on Liberator death tallies. Even among Q4 numbers.
  18. Savadrin

    But neither does this ;)

  19. Demigan

    1 C4 locks up all controls and causes the engine to shut down for 3 seconds or so? Would be great!

    In fact, I would love to see similar things for all aircraft. Ground vehicles that go burning have reduced speed and agility, air vehicles don't seem to suffer from that but also get a fire suppression that heals twice as much? They can do with a temporary shutdown of their vehicle the moment they get burning. Or at least when they reach burning stage after receiving more than 30% damage within 2 seconds. Yes yes you would still be able to use fire suppression to counter it, but as long as damage keeps you burning...

    It would be just a start of the balancing of aircraft vs ground. Aside from the ESF advantages (auto-granted afterburner that is instantly at max level nowadays and is only reduced and not removed when something else is put in the slot) all aircraft have at least:
    -more weapon systems than ground counterparts (ESF: two weapons for the pilot instead of the Lightning two, Liberator: 3 seats with guns instead of the MBT two, Galaxy: 4 gunner seats instead of the Sunderer two, Valkyrie: 1 gun 4 rumble seats and squad spawn instead of the Harasser 1 gun and 1 rumble seat).
    -Better weapons. Almost every aircraft has weapons that are at the very least an upgrade, if not an outright outperforming weapon of mass-destruction compared to it's counterpart. Hornets have 150% more DPS against MBT's than the Vanguard AP before the reload speed upgrades which have double the effect on Hornets, Drakes have higher accuracy and maybe more compared to basilisks, Rocketpods beat the crap out of any HE variant, TB and Dalton's are a world apart from almost any AP gun except an anchored AP Prowler which as it suggests has to sacrifice all mobility to even do it, all AI noseguns are a step up from the ground counterparts with higher DPS+magazine and better AV capabilities (if the ground counterparts such as Canister even have AV capabilities) and even freaking bulldogs have higher velocity and therefore less drop than their ground counterparts).
    -better abilities. Abilities on aircraft regenerate faster and last longer (IE ESF afterburners vs Harasser and Liberator afterburners vs Magrider). Not to mention things like fire suppression doing twice the health regen or flares having a use compared to smoke since you actually have time to escape during your flare being active.
    -Either a lack of resistance or a complete denial make it easy to pick your fights. There's almost no middle ground, aircraft either dominate or leave the battle for where they can dominate.
    -Highest speeds in the game. Even just starting to accelerate will propel you faster than most ground vehicles can go at top speed, with a Galaxy.

    Compared to that, having the disadvantage of getting all your controls locked up if you receive X% damage and reach burning stage is a pretty sweet deal.
  20. LodeTria

    Most air vehicles do loose a lot of mobility when they go on fire, the ESF suffers with that aspect the least though.
    Only the ESF Fire Sup is 25%, the rest are all 12%.