The Ultimate Thread for calling out the flawed arguments used when talking about C4 Vs. MBT's

It's not technically "point blank." It has a 3m inner damage radius which translates to a kill radius of 3.71m for all classes without Flak Armor, 3.89m for Infiltrators without Flak Armor, and, of course, you'll never survive it if it lands right under your feet.

For Vehicles, C-4 does bonus damage to all targets, 1.3x to Galaxies being the lowest multiplier and Prowlers and Magriders having a lofty damage multiplier of 2.5x. At a radius of 3.71m dropped on the ground off target of an MBT, a single brick of C-4 will do about 2500 damage.

It would be funny to see C4 as lunge mines.

Nobody can pay attention all the time. Thats what this game is about and youll get destroyed because of it. Try to pay attention as much as possible to avoid death as much as possible <Read my first post where i said this

Oh really? LA are the only thing? Anything with C 4. Engies with tank mines?

A huge tank will often destroy groups of people before being destroyed and thats fine. You dont have to survive all that long to pull another tank you know. Youre making petty assumptions there.

And tankers have made myriads of tank kill streak and camping videos. Whats your point? Is that supposed to be supporting evidence? Its poor

Based on your presented arguments i can assume youre not a particularly bright player or are heavily biased that an infantry unit can actually counter your tank

I give you an F- for effort

Joking aside

C 4 is not the issue. There are issues with the MBT guns and certain abilities. But the C 4 itself isnt an issue. If you change C 4 for LA youll be weakening other classes needlessly and killing the wrong bird with a bad stone

Look for other solutions>Wrotethoseinmypostthatyoudidntread< before kneejerking after someone rightfully killed you

It has been OVER 2 years and your still going?? Give it a rest people it's not going to happen.

Wouldn't the only class that be weakened irreparably be the Combat Medic? Asides Infiltrator, who didn't have C-4 in the first place, and him, the rest of the classes have potent AV outlets.

Said this back in 2014 (why da fuq was this necro'd?) and its still true now.

If you get C4'd you got killed by a useless Light Assault because you were being useless yourself.

Don't do that. Be useful, don't die. Or just stop complaining about it. Seriously. You all sound like a whiny b-tch with like 30 cats. Knock it off.

>> www.WorldOfTanks.com <<

FREE TO PLAY GAME, BASED ON NC CONNERY AUTISM
JOIN THOUSANDS OF OTHER CASUAL AUTISTS TODAY!

When this thread was originally made, the prowler did have a delay coming out of lockdown. It was only late 2015, around the 3rd anniversary, that it can move instantly after un-delpoying. I dunno if you're responding to the old posts when his would have been accurate, or the new ones because some pleb decided to necro.

The picture: That guy is well within 50m distance, so no he doesn't have to wait long. Also I dare bet that that tank did not react when you spotted the fairy (neither did the infantry I guess until it went up).
And again, if that guy had done something, like... Move...? Saying "But I seem to be safe" is the worst argument ever. On a ridge I also move, I see a target, dial in the range, fire a shot or two, move a little, even a little, then keep firing. And you know what? I rarely ever get C4red, when I do get C4red I know why: I did something obvious and was punished for it. Why can't you guys do the same? Blame yourselves as you should rather than the C4 fairy.

At 100m away you can easily spot them in advance, even with very high mountains. Considering C4 fairies will usually drop from the same mountainous area even if they do use drifter jets you can do the A&A: anticipate and annihilate.

Yes! That's that video that proves the complete and utter obliviousness of tankers!
Did you notice how the LA is well within gun elevation for most of his approach? How the LA is shot at multiple times (and thus spotted) and the tankers fail to react? How the tankers (and gunners) should be anticipating him, spotting him during his approach (after all, he uses the same direction for most of his jumps) and killing him? How they completely and utterly fail to defend themselves because they simply do not try to defend themselves even after repeated destruction?

JohnGalt tried using that one as well, and it only proves my point: The tankers that are as easily destroyed as that fail to even try to protect themselves. Why should a game mechanic change when the tankers don't even try?

As I already said, Valkyrie and Galaxy dropped LA could need some changes, but any other C4 fairy? Absolutely not.

Try one: He's standing almost on top of an enemy spawn bunker and it's pure and simple luck that he isn't spotted by the few enemies already walking around.
Try two: He's well within elevation range for most of his flight, C4rs one tank, the other does not react to it and does not try to find the culprit, then dies.
Try three: Definitely visible for almost his entire flight, the tank is tunnel visioning and not trying to spot possible hostiles approaching him and dies accordingly.
Try four: He finds an Harasser in extremely enclosed space (Inside a Biolab), Harasser dies. Anyone even surprised at this one?
Try five: He C4rs a Mozzy, if an aircraft, mobile agile aircraft, gets C4red he had it coming. Especially when hovering around a Biolab pad, where you can expect at least one smart guy to make use of their hovermode antics.
Try six: The poor Mozzy got a disconnect or something and isn't moving on the C4 fairies screen, he makes use of that by destroying the Mozzy. This could have been done with any class.
Try seven: See try five
Try eight: See try five, substitute "Mozzy" for "Valkyrie"
Try nine: Finally one where the LA is not within elevation range for most of his flight! Took only 9 video tries (also note that this is a montage of separate killstreaks, the bases and continents vary). You see the power of movement, the Vanguard causes the player to move even lower. Then the Vanguard stops and is C4red. This is so far the only case where the Vanguard really couldn't have done anything. Although some teamwork could have saved him should one AA oriented guy have been around to spot and kill the LA.
Try ten: Aircraft should be be targets enough to be C4red, if they were, fault on them.
Try eleven: An aircraft that comes in close enough on his own volition to get C4red is his own fault.

Eleven tries, one, maybe two could be seen as problematic (the Valkyrie at the tower in try ten and the Vanguard in try nine).

G2A weapons have been in need for an upgrade, nevertheless in tank groups you should simply be prepared for an AA attack, this instantly helps cover against C4 fairies. Alternatively you can have some infantry check around you once in a while to spot any C4 fairies.

It shouldn't have been easy, but the tank drivers made it easy. Do not blame C4 fairies for this. If infiltrators assume their camouflage is a full-on stealth module and start running you punish them for their bad gameplay by spotting, shooting and killing them. Then they should adapt and use the infiltrator camouflage as it should be used.
Tank drivers that pay attention make it hard, extremely hard to almost impossible if they really pay attention.

You couldn't adapt to 1,5 second TTK rocket pods that could clear out entire Zergs because the approach and time to react were simply too short. There was no way to effectively protect yourself from them, even if you took dedicated AA (which was only available on MAX's at the time).
However, you can adapt to LA. Infantry looks around for places where LA could be. Not all do it as well, but they try. Tank drivers however? They sit in a tank feeling impervious, and stop trying to protect themselves against those things that can kill them. Why don't you look around? Why don't you move? You can claim "oh but the elevation is bad" but even if we did give you 360 degree spherical vision current tank drivers would be toast simply because they don't use it.

Also you talk about how people use something. Well tank drivers use their tanks as a big, fat, turret. It's got treads, It can move. It can look around much higher than you expect it too. This is because the FOV of a tank adds much, much more vision to the elevation of the gun. Even if you can't shoot the LA, you can spot it and anticipate, make sure he can't hit you (move around a little), wait for him to drop down and it's a squishy little bit of extra XP for you, with any luck he'll drop his C4 anyway and lose some resources for nothing.

How many times does that happen? Oh yeah rarely, because the tankers do not try to defend themselves.
Sure, when C4 is used as an AV weapon you can nerf the AOE, fine by me. It will barely make a lick of difference for current tank drivers, they make themselves easy targets anyway, as shown in the video's you presented.

Gee, maybe the comparison between the vastly more accurate of standing still infantryt that will still move around and ADAD a lot to... not get hit... Was the point I'm making?
Yes, tanks have much more problems with terrain than infantry, the slightest bump throws off your aim. Still you can adapt, move, stop, aim, shoot, move. Similar to infantry this will make you harder to hit, both for enemy tanks and for C4 fairies.
And even if the concept of tactics and flanking did occur to you, why aren't you using it? You might be using some of it, but not all. Why not try to protect yourself from LA?

First of all, using an aircraft to bail costs resources. Second of all, why shouldn't someone be capable of spending a heap of resources and effort for a chance to kill a target? Because by absolutely no means is using an aircraft to drop a C4fairy on top of a tank a guaranteed kill. You might not accept that, but that's just how it is. Tanks are no guarantee for safe passage, aircraft C4 fairies aren't a guarantee for a kill.

What kind of reaction is this? I say that yes, infantry shouldn't complain about C4 because it doesn't cost a lot of certs. But I add that it's expensive if you add things like time taken and risks. The last stretch towards a tanker that does not try to protect himself is easy, but unless you have a specific spawnpoint you'll often need to fight through/avoid the enemy Zerg to get to them in the first place.
All you see is a big fireball and some cut video's of LA dropping out of aircraft or using jumppads, you don't see all the times they failed because they didn't use either and had to fight through hordes of enemies or were killed by an attentive player that happened upon them. Most bases do not have jumppads nearby, most C4 fairies do not use aircraft.

Boo hoo? Hey! We have AI loadouts on tanks! But for some reason no one uses them because... You know... Tanks are actually more lethal, dangerous and can guarantee a kill in most situations while infantry cannot. Also AP canons serve pretty well as AI weapons so why use anything else?
This only shows how terrible the infantry AV is (and how bad HE has become), tanks should be using AI and AV loadouts 50/50, they use it 10/90. Anyway, this is no excuse for having one tank, one, to get an anti-infantry top gun. You might **** yourself against tanks, but in return you ungimp your entire tank group against C4 fairies. It's a trade-off. Do you know what a trade-off is? Do you know why a game needs trade-offs? To prevent having one specific loadout be used and the rest of the game's variation is left to rust somewhere?
Also it's not a mediocre increase, well it is if you have the tunnel-vision style gunner, but hey then we get to the "hey guys, you could look around you once in a while you know" argument again.

"High altitude high altitude". You at least know that the problem isn't with the C4 fairies that come at you from lower elevations. Yet you still try to pass off video's showing perfectly visible and easily counterable C4 fairies as "high altitude C4 fairies". Most C4 kills can be prevented by spotting the LA in advance and avoiding/killing him, that's simply how it is. But tankers fail over and over again to try and protect themselves against C4.
I've already mentioned that the Valkyrie and Galaxy C4 fairies could need a change, even though there's two viable counters against it (move and use an AA/AI gun with high elevation to spot and kill them) this is just a bit too low of a good counter against them for the relative ease a C4 fairy has in approaching a tank after dropping from high altitude. But you don't want to nerf just them do you? You want to instantly remove the entire option to C4 fairy, even if the guy simply ran up to you and blew you up. Otherwise you wouldn't have needed all your points from A to K to explain it, as I directly agreed with high altitude C4 fairies being somewhat of a problem compared to other C4 fairies. So you have a completely different agenda, and are trying to cover it up by pointing at high altitude C4 fairies as that's the only place your arguments have some truth to them.

They lose the fastest way to take a tank out Via sneak attack

C4 is always better than rockets if youre up close and tank mines have to be driven over rather than activated

Thats a huge loss in killing power for the classes that not many people have a big issue with C 4ing

I realize this

There are still people who make that argument to day for the prowler and max suit

Ive also been watching the Necros for this thread and wanted to reply in full to shut everyone up

But that wont happen

(No, i didn't read the 19 previous pages of this thread.)

I'm a LA noob but i know spitfires are a nightmare for LAs. Why not using one near your tanks (especially with Prowlers) when you're spamming walls with HE rounds ?

About the "high altitude C4 fairies"...Well, i guess creativity must be rewarded. In the 2 videos, i see people in stationary vehicules being destroyed. Lack of awareness or lack of knowledge of a game mechanic. 99% of those destroyed vehicules have been outplayed by a creative guy. I don't really see any need for nerfing creativity in games. ( But maybe i don't know enough about the problems Demigan highlighted ).

About the LA bricks, which is their radius ? Which is the radius of HE rounds ? (Serious question).
LAs have only 2 bricks when tanks can fire loads of amnos on infantry and/or vehicules. Risk versus reward.

As far as i understood it, each tank will now come with a default radar after an incoming patch.

spitfires together defending a static position are effective vs LAs outside of squads/platoons you won't see them i don't think.

experienced C4 users do high attitude attacks because it is outside of the elevation range of tank's weapons (aside from AA guns which AP tanks will not run as it makes them dead meat to other pure AP tanks) that i think is the biggest issue for experienced tankers.

For less experienced tankers it's that they don't know or use methods of staying out of the reach of traditional LA attacks via trees, buildings etc.

HE round 1HK radius is 1m (except prowler which requires a direct hit or a 2HK) C4's lethal radius is about 3m for infantry and tanks (flak armor not included)

lightnings can now cert into engagement radar to use in the utility slot which lets them see hostile aircraft within it's radius (max rank is 600m, aircraft with max stealth are not detected). useful on a skyguard if you play behind the front line where you probably won't need FS.

Stats are only useful if you actually provide the needed background. How about not only using KDR but also KPH? The tanks could spend 30minutes (on average) racking up those kills, whilst the LA gets the kill in less than 2 minutes. I'm not defending it, just saying your stats are practically worthless as a stand-alone argument.

Aye I agree, using data that as a stand-alone argument brings nothing (but desperately needs additional background info to be relevant). If he wants to use that data, he better use it properly. I assume you didn't mean this, but I still wanted to include your post since you seemed to blindly agree with it, without looking critically at the data set. People will generally take any argument supporting their case for granted, and only look critically at other things.

BWAAHAHAHAAH

Am I the only tanker that doesn't have these LA problems??? Sure they get me every now and then, but tank mines, libs and esfs are more of a problem for me than anything else...

people hate&complain about things they consider cheese, even if they don't get killed much by it. explains the hate on all tankers from infantry. let's not forget some of them lump all tankers together as 'farmers'.

C4 doesn't bother me i get killed by it a little bit compared to all the other stuff that kills me. once you know all the ways to reasonably avoid C4 you should die alot less to it and be less bothered when you do die to C4.

I don't know about "nightmare", but they give us away to others. Losing the element of surprise to one of these stupid NPC turrets pisses me off.

I'll just drop this here.

It takes a mag to take out from beyond detection distance, and unless engi wastes implant slot on marker, it only tells "someone is somewhere within detection area". It's basically a motion spotter, but big, loud, warns about only 1 enemy, and deployed once per resupply. Even MagScatter looks OP near Spit-fires.

You're in an elite club.

The few
The proud
The AWARE.