[Suggestion] Make HA rockets use nanites!!

Seriously guys. What explosive does any infantry get to carry that DOESN'T use nanites?? You can't get a tiny grenade without nanites wtf does an HA get a holster full of giant rockets that are also refillable by ammo packs? WTF? How does this make sense? Discuss..

I tried searching for this but forum search function sucks.

What next? Ammo for nanites?

PS Flyboys must suffer.

Has nothing to do with flying honestly. Ground pounders usually run flares and leave the area until they recycle. This is a legit question. And I'm pretty sure it was prob an issue long before entitlement locks were given to all the welfare children of PS2 anyways.

Agreed, anyone who flies an ESF must suffer

Not sure what I mainly do in game keeps you from objectively looking at the point that was given. I can't help that you suck with ESFs. Doesn't make my point less valid because I am better at something than you are. You'll get far in life with that attitude.

ESFs should therefore have to pay nanites to refill rockets at a landing pad then? Just to keep things even. But then tanks should have to pay by the shell too, and a flash with a fury?

Since when has much in this game made sense; your expectations are flawed.

A suggestion that I think I've put forward before to slightly reduce rocket spam. Engineers get two types of ammo pack, the standard ammo pack, and an explosive ordinance pack. One does bullets only, other does anything that explodes only; engie cannot carry both at once.

Why would vehicles have to pay? They already cost nanites to create. Also asking that rockets require nanites isn't against the standard for infantry. They already require nanites for nearly everything they carry besides normal bullets and these things can only be restocked at a terminal, and for good reason, to prevent spam. The HA rockets are the ONLY exception to this rule (that I can think of at the moment).

If HAs want to keep their reloadable no nanite rockets how about we do the same for C4/grenades. No nanites and refillable by ammo packs. Watch everyone scream bloody murder at that idea.

Will AV turret rockets, Spitfires, Recon darts, UBGL rounds etc. etc. cost nanites as well?

Nanites should cost ROCKETS!!!!

Anything that uses explosives. AV turrets and spitfires sure why not. Everything already costs nanites. I figured more people would be more onboard with this to try and pull the game away from Heavyside a bit.

Okay. Rockets now cost Nanites to use. They also do as much damage as a brick of C4.
Happy?

As annoying as rockets are to all aspects of vehicle play (not just because they deal damage but rather deal damage at 450 meters and is spammable) having them cost nanites would be bad for the game as a whole. Even if it costed 30 nanites per rocket or 10, all it would do is drain nanites for no particular reason except to punish playing a class to counter vehicles. It's like if we had barbed wire on rooftops that killed lights for being up there or a grenade that made ammo packs explode killing engies who provide ammo.

Calm down satan...

This would fix a ton of problems. If G2A rockets cost nanites, they could be buffed through the roof because they couldn't be spammed. I personally think they should 1-shot ESFs, take more skill to use, but still be avoidable. If AT rockets cost nanites and only 1 could be carried then they could be much more powerful against tanks, maybe 1 to the rear, 2 to the side and 3 to the front, but those rockets should cost the same as a tank. They also couldn't be spammed down hallways or in choke points on infantry. I really think the move would be good for everyone.

I don't think Rocket Launcher ammo should cost Nanites, thats just a terrible design. The extended resupply time is the method of balancing them and they aren't very problematic. Whenever I'm running vehicles my biggest problem is other vehicles, Engineer AV turrets, or C4 fairies. HA rocket launchers only really become an issue for me in close range, but at that range a quick blast to the face with my AP gun and they are put down real quick.

Okay I'm not sure if you mean AV turrets should cost Nanites per shot but dear god I hope not. The AV turret certification is already pricey enough in Certs. I could see the reasoning for The turrets themselves costing Nanites, IF they gave the AV turret a shield similar to the Infantry turret, and they also made the Spitfire even more durable. As of now both those turrets are plated with Styrofoam and them costing Nanites would be obscene.

I do understand your desire to tone down the Heavy Assault class, but making rockets cost Nanites would be too costly considering their power.

G2A rockets one shotting ESF's?!?! Okay I'm going to assume you mean non-lock rockets because how can you possibly make lock-ons require skill? Non-lock rocket launchers nearly one-shot ESF already and usually a few additional shots before or after the rocket hits an ESF it will die. Lock-On rockets are already avoidable if you just fly low to the ground, since the way rockets fly they usually run into a hill or some other object.

I'm not entirely certain what AT rockets are to you, are they AP rockets on vehicles? If i recall correctly every rocket launcher can be considered "AT" except for the one that simple can't lock onto ground vehicles. However in any case a one-shotting rocket launcher to the rear of a tank, whether it be a Lightning or MBT, would be absolutely overpowered. There amount of HA bum rushing would just overwhelm any armor zerg. Also in large scale battles, a tank can get rained upon by rockets out of nowhere without any possible warning. The ground vehicle game would be destroyed.

As for the rocket primary spam, I see what you mean, however I don't think making rockets expensive to use is a good solution. Instead the swap times for rocket launchers should be greatly increased, preventing the panic rocketing that some people do.

No, imagine the amount of vehicles as people ran out of nanites during bigger fights....

This would be a direct buff to vehicles and should never EVER happen!

I made a whole post about lock-ons. I think the mechanic needs to be changed to make it rewarding for the shooter and a challenge for the pilot.
https://forums.daybreakgames.com/ps2/index.php?threads/g2a-and-a2a-missiles.243507/#post-3432739

By AT I meant anti-tank, sorry for using the wrong terminology.

Careful or DBG might get some ideas from this thread. They'll give away all the guns & vehicle weapon systems away for free but then players have to pay RL cash to re-arm them.

T

There's a big difference between what we're talking about and real life cash pay to win changes. Thankfully Daybreak is good about steering clear of pay to win.

The creed of my Planetman life