To every light assault upset about the upcoming C4 changes.

Then C4 is just a horrible mine, Cause mines auto trigger and C4 does not.

How are you supose to plant a c4 change on a tank when they have 3rd person view??? They can see you every single time or at least the should.

Tears are salty, but more on subject. Realism is NOT A FACTOR. if you want realism, give me a sniper with which I can shoot the whole radius of the map. Give me artillery to bombard your tanks. Assuming VS shoot lasers (light), they should have a 300 000 000 m/s velocity. I'd also like real HEAT rounds against tanks. Give us cluster bombs with the liberator. The kind which leaves behind thousands of explosions and even more mines that will detonate when someone steps on/nearby (baboom).

Your idea was said many times, but it's a bad one and will be shot down the same way.

If I recall, the majority of VS weapons are plasma based, not laser based. Plasma, being matter (the stuff in the sun or in your TV set), does not move at the speed of light (arguably it would probably be slower than conventional bullets).

The only VS weapons that mention that they are laser based are the Scythe's Saron and Hailstorm. And even then I'd say "laser" might be more like a particle accelerator than an actual laser if the Saron HRB's description is accurate.

In real life, You cant spawn tanks with nanites every 7 minutes.

It would take heavy modification, but you could fit that on a tank (probably). Chop down the barrel size to adjust the effective range to 100m, reduce or internalize most of the ammo pool, chop down ROF to Vulcan ROF (may reduce mechanism size and weight), and you should be about there.

Although we can always take the cop out that is "Nanites" (nanite ammo pool, nanite heat sinks, nanite mechanisms etc.). Nanites are such a buzzkill :|

You would have raged on him either short or long still yea I'm going to enjoy this update. Thinking up new tactics to take down tanks seeing people having to grab tanks themselves and coordinate a counter attack against armor.

Oh yea and I do destroy armor myself it's just too easy with a lancer.

Look at my sig. Specifically Last On.

Does it seem that i really care?

You know all people are gonna do is bring an explosive crossbow and/or UBGL right? Or they're going to switch to cheesier weapons like Hornets (double guided decimators on an ESF... Who thought this was a good idea?) and just use that instead or as an opening move.

The Lancer would be a lot harder to use if you actually renderred to your targets .

While an interesting idea, unfortunately cutting down barrel length means a loss of velocity, which in turn pretty much kills the effectiveness of a kinetic penetrator.

It's the same principle why a 9x19 handgun round fired out of a carbine will achieve much higher energy than the same round fired out of a handgun.

So cutting a GAU-8 down to an extremely short length (as in the Tank Buster or Vulcan) would result in extreme velocity loss and an associated decrease to the penetration ability of each shell. It's not only about the shell or caliber, but of a whole set of characteristics that allows a weapon to function as it does.

True, maybe they switched to chemically activated penetration (oxidizes, then flashes, and leaves damage in a short period of time) to make up for design issues.

idk, kinda hard to guess what they are doing to compensate for future tech when all we know is they use nanites

My own personal theory on the matter is that PS2 is just a giant training simulation to prepare Auraxians for the invasion of Earth. In that sense, we only take damage because we're programmed to take damage when hit by "projectiles".

Otherwise, really nothing in the game makes sense at all to anyone with an understanding of physics.

you realize you are just mad and that is not real just an image made by a computer... lets pretend you are not schizophrenic. lets do it and that is a real vehicle.

Well, at least the every handheld rocket IRL can travel further than what is in the game, which is a significant advantage for HAs if they had such a range. Even engineer AT turrets don't deal as much boom as Kornets or TOWs.

Disclaimer: I'm not trying to ask for changes to AT rockets (I wouldn't mind buffing the range).

We have the fireworks for that

I'd be all for a tanks being harder to take down... if there was a limited number of them available. But since you can just go pull one right away again. NOPE SCREW YOU SUCK IT.

Irrelevant. The technology is what's important to point out, the caliber can always e adjusted up or down as needs require. The difference between an AP bullet and and AP shell is little more than diameter and weight.

You even mentioned that modern-day Anti-armor chain-guns use Depleted Uranium shells - as I've mentioned. Tungsten Carbide is another good option, but ultimately it's all about the tech being available or not.

And while armor tech will ofc improve it's almost always the case that defensive tech lags behind offensive tech all along the way. Someone finds some new way to make modern day MBT's resistant to the Anti-Armor options of the past - like the mentioned anti-tank rifles that are now obsolete - and soon someone comes up with a new armor-piercing shell for your own MBT primary cannons that punch through the armor of your enemy. Back to square one.

Should be 2 C4's = 1 dead tank. Nuff said. This is futuristic too not modern warfare.

But that technology has taken to a different phase: ATGMs. Bullets have roughly reached their peak efficiency against modern armor, because as the size of the GAU-8 indicates you need a really big gun to make it work.

In other words anti-tank bullets are a complete dead end. Killing tanks with bullets just seems so inefficient when a long-range missile could do the same job better and safer. This of course also takes into account that outside of PS2, AA is normally quite effective and dangerous so getting close enough to gun down a tank is far riskier.

So yes, both offensive and defensive technology will improve together. But that doesn't mean that certain weapons and methods won't become obsolete. Otherwise we'd be using anti-tank rocks, clubs, and spears!

MARCH ROADMAP UPDATE
Due to the game being too damn hard, MBTs will now be invincible to everything except other MBTs. Furthermore, MBTs will now self steer and aim, all the 1/2 Tanker needs to do to win at life is press 1 of 3 buttons when appropriate!

Why do people keep on saying you have to place C4 and arm it, I mean the only 2 reasons we don't do this in real life is because 1). It turns you into a walking bomb which is suicidal. And 2). You don't want to damage the blast cap or other components to either cause it to accidentally go off or render it broken and useless.

But in PS2 Auraxis, we have infinite lives with no fear and no consequences so point #1 is pointless and #2 is highly depends on our technology to withstand the shock and impact of falling.

In fact C4 is very stable compared to other explosive ordinances like tanks shells or rockets.