He did, he showed you the picture where the LA has specific directives for tank destruction. The developers know what the LA is used for and specifically created a directive for them to complete. The only way LA's can do that is by using C4, they have no other real option to destroy any vehicle. By nerfing C4, they should start removing the tank destruction directive I think. I don't agree with his actual statement and reasoning below it though. 0/3 for the first tier directive is a lot. It's much easier to gun down 15 people than get 3 vehicle kills as starting player, and at later stages those vehicle kills become a pain even when you are tank hunting... I did all the tanks I could kill every time again but still my shotgun and carbine kills are filled before I get my vehicle kills, and I don't use the SMG on my LA... Sometimes I even get the LA kill directive before my vehicle kill directive, that's kinda sad with how little people take the LA. The Dev's don't exactly do things we expect them to do it. The LA has an anti-vehicle directive which we reason to be because he is a vehicle killer, but the one class that was designed as a vehicle killer (HA) doesn't even have a directive in it? The LA has a limited amount of skills that it can bring to the table. With his jetpack he can infiltrate and seek a good position, and he is the one class that can effectively go up to tanks and C4 them where others just get gunned down if they try. Well that's a big list of useful abilities in a game where other classes have several unique things for them to use. Don't get me wrong, I love the LA to bits and use his jetpack all the time, but by taking away the instagib tanks ability you basically nerf 50% of the class abilities in one go, and it's not even an official ability! C4ring tanks is hard... if the tanks pay attention. Most tanks I c4 are tunnel visioned farmers who don't even look around if you jump on them, or people who think that parking your tank beneath cover that allows people to walk up to your cover, jump over and blow them up. Another problem that people don't seem to realize is that C4 fairies need to remain unspotted all the time. One infantry that spots them during the last leg of their journey, flying towards the tank with C4 in hand, and you are toast. While flying you are a wonderful target. You need to get close enough first, and that means not being spotted by any infantry along the way or being able to fight them off or elude them. Furthermore you are going up against tanks, they can OHK you with a good hit, and if they just start driving as you drop your first C4 you can get away from the second one and survive. and there's 2 C4 on resources down the drain. It's a dangerous, time consuming tactic, that basically only works because the mentality of the game is to cry about C4 and have them nerfed rather than learning to avoid that rock outcrop where you were C4red 6 times over or looking around occasionally when farming a base. So there you have it. There is nothing wrong with the ability to instagib tanks. In fact, engineers do it even cheasier. Rather than needing through all the trouble to remain unseen and place their C4, hoping to be able to set it off before they are gunned down, the engineer places a few mines and leaves. These mines can be placed in micro ditches and at the end of bridges or behind tiny rocks so they become almost invisible to Q-spotting (although the Q-spot through terrain bug seems to have solved that in part), and you can instagib tanks that way. Tank mines get more vehicle kills than C4, take less effort and you can carry more, oh and they have become more responsive and with a better AOE since last patch. But nooooooooooo, it's the C4 on just LA that needs nerfing? What the heck? Why does the skillful method need nerfing if there's a cheasy way to do it better that people just like to ignore?
Uhhh.....I don't think you read what you replied to. I'm arguing FOR the current state of LA and C4 balance. I'm saying that I don't think there's anything unbalanced about C4 'instagib' on tanks. I like agree with everything you said. Just confused lol.
Isn't that a bit extreme? Just because C4 doesn't OHK, it doesn't mean that it's completely useless for blowing up tanks. And there are other vehicles in the game besides tanks to destroy. With tank HP buff, this list simply will get another strike: Strike 4. My tank was damaged. Boom I blow up. I know how tankers that get blown up by C4 feel. It's the same feel I get when I'm minding my LA business on some roof and an ESF appears out of nowhere and lolpods / noseguns me to the death. It's unfair ******** I had no chance to defend against, and I don't even want to have in the game, because even when I can fight back - it's not fun and I don't care for it. We make arguments that it's tanker's fault for getting C4'd, and most of the time it's true. But we have to consider bigger picture. All kinds of people play this game, both skilled and unskilled. Should the game really be fun only for the skilled people? Most people don't have time / effort to invest into getting better. What I don't get is why SOE in their infinite wisdom thinks that one tank should not be OHK'd by one infantryman within 10m, who gets one attempt, and why at the same time one tank can OHK many infantrymen from range, and he gets lots of attempts. I say - they nerf lethality, then nerf it all the way, and remove OHK from tank rounds. It would be only fair. LA rarely was a best class to go against vehicles anyway. I only enjoy playing LA when there are no vehicles around. All our problems stem from our "lone wolf" mentality. PlanetSide 2 is really meant to be played in a squad. If your squad has a number of dedicated HA players or tankers that routinely take care of enemy vehicle threats, you won't even notice the changes.
I know you were for the LA rebalance, but you didn't provide any real arguments against his points, so I added it to them (or that was my goal). I'm trying to get as much details and fair arguments on the table, no matter if it's for or against me. It can be extreme, but it doesn't have to be. Just consider all the scenario's where you can effectively C4 a tank, most of the scenario's I can think off are tanks with full health, as tanks that are battling usually have too many friendly and hostile eyes on them to C4 and survive until you pull the trigger. By nerfing the OHK capabilities you nerfed almost all viable scenario's where you can C4-kill someone, without it being a simple target of oppertunity. The context matters, and I think the context is that most C4 attacks aren't on damaged vehicles. I think both situations are a bit more nuanced than that. You simply can't avoid an ESF appearing out of nowhere and mauling you. Just crossing a courtyard means they have time to come from the horizon, and if you wait just for a second they have time to spot and kill you before you reach the safety. The same can count for vehicles and a Liberator, a Tankbuster to the top and Dalton afterwards can kill you with just as much impunity without any reasonable means of escape. On the other hand, staying safe from C4 fairies is much easier. By smart placement, dirty tricks such as placing the new turret behind you as a warning system, having friendly infantry nearby or simple good situational awareness you can avoid just about every C4 fairy, even right now you can avoid death just by driving away the moment they throw their first C4, as the second will usually miss. Although there are ways to make it almost impossible to get away by using ESF to get to your target, that also means you pay more resources than the tanker for a short strike, after which you have no resources, ESF or C4 to continue, as opposed to flanking it with a vehicle and attacking the next afterwards. And then there's the whole Tank mine thing. Tank mines get more vehicle kills and are cheasier, but no-one seems to think the low-skill "fire and forget" instakill weapons need nerfing. Only the higher skill pseudo ability of the LA needs nerfing. Yes, that is true, entirely true. I have said it myself and it's unfair that I use it when it suits my needs (although, who wouldn't on a forum?). Still, I think that there is a subjective misalignment between people that play the game. As said, tank mines are easier to use with less risk and get more vehicle kills, but for some reason people don't ask for a nerf about those. I remember someone complaining about C4 who thought that the other two factions got "C4 that needs only one brick to kill a tank, while my faction needs two". For some reason people refuse to learn about C4 fairies, while with any other game mechanic they learn it well. If you get gunned down in a courtyard time and again, you will find a way to avoid the courtyard, find another route through or use the trick yourself. That's what the average player does all the time. But when they get blown up by C4, they can give you a hate tell and then park their tank in the exact same spot not 2 minutes later, and they can do that several days in a row. I am really wondering, why are people so stubborn when it comes to C4? I rarely ever get C4'red, and almost every time it happens I knew I was to blame for sticking to a building with enemies inside etc. You don't complain about being killed by tanks when you get in their path either. Some of it is justified, a tank costs resources, has a more limited playfield and can't be gotten anywhere on a whim. But there should be a border. If you take the effort to avoid detection and C4 someone, sacrificing a bunch of nanites in the process, then I think you should be rewarded, not be forced to have a friendly damage it beforehand or finish it off afterwards. Besides, I think many people would still be opposed to C4 fairies after the nerf. People will start complaining about killstealers, as the most likely time you can C4 is when the enemy tank column is disintegrating and there's time to get close and target a damaged tank.
Honestly, I don't even have a problem with being one hit killed. Its an FPS and its on a large scale with many factors. I expect that sometimes I will just not have a chance to fight back. Its when inescapable death becomes the norm rather than the exception its a problem, which in some cases, its problematic in PS2. Unfortunately, its also those moments of "inescapable death" that actually make things functional in many circumstances in PS2. Mines, for example, in a game where you can be healed from the verge of keeling over to good as new, need to be a "bang your dead" proposition. Why? Because if they're not they are almost irrelevant in the way they are used on PS2. A damaged tank is not a hindrance unless it happens in the heat of a battle with people nearby to exploit it. Otherwise its just repair exp. Same with AP mines. They either kill you and prevent you from accessing a particular location, or they don't and you get healed the moment you get to a terminal/pop a restoration from your utility, or have a medic come by. Same with C4. If you drop 1 c4 and then have absolutely no weapon capable of hurting a tank, you basically haven't accomplished anything. The tank is still there, you can't fly around long enough to follow the tank to its repair hideyhole, and you certainly can't engage it with your shotgun or carbine. Deaths, kills, and resources come fast in planetside 2, and people have to be able to accept there's going to be a little bit of "slop" in the gameplay. random things happen and the convergences of many events you can't possibly predict can result in your dying. Its the price you pay for having battles with so many individuals. The overall problem isn't even going to be balance in nerfing C4. C4ed tanks are generally tanks that park outside of base walls or remain stationary for long periods of time to farm, and said tanks are also targets for AV turrets and rocket heavies because they are easy targets. The problem is that planetside 2 is a game about effectively, eternal war. Eternal anything is boring. If you don't have lots of novelty in the way you use your tools and how you approach situations everything stagnates. Every tool you take away as being generally useful like chopping weeks or months off of the overall games lifespan. While the ratio of victories or tank to infantry kills might not change majorly with a C4 nerf, the enjoyment and desire to play the LA class will be drastically reduced which reduces the overall diversity of the game and environment. Look at the response most players have to air defense weapons. Its not that they don't get rid of aircraft. Its not that they can't kill aircraft. Its not like aircraft can just operate under them freely. But they aren't satisfying to use because they don't get kills. You don't get a cathartic thrill of victory, rather you just get the feeling your Sisyphus, stuck with an interminable and pointless task, regardless of how important to victory it might actually be. Same with C4, same with so many weapons in the game.
In short, you're either dead or in tip top shape because engineers, medics, and various skills. To barely survive is to be fully ready for battle in the next 5 seconds if you have a decent company. "Crippling" doesn't really exist unless you take continuous damage that challenges your ability to repair or heal.
No I think he's spot on. Don't forget, the Lightning is also getting a HUGE armor buff too. That really hurts LA, because sticking two bricks on such a mobile vehicle is going to be pretty hit or miss. So what other vehicles can LA take out? Sunderers? Nope, Deploy Shield. Harassers? Nope, WAY too mobile. Aircraft? LAWL. The Flash. Yeah, LA's can still farm abandoned Flash's , woo hoo. Maybe emotionally this "feels" the same, but there's a pretty huge difference here. An ESF can come out of nowhere at high speed and gank you before you even knew you were in danger. If you let an LA C4 your tank...you were just dumb and not paying attention. Or you just got outplayed, but you at least had a chance. Once that ESF see's you, you are dead. That's NOT the same as MBT vs LA. Hell all they have to do is back away or drive off, throw a shell in your face, problem solved. So people shouldn't have to invest a little time and get good to see success? It's not like I grabbed C4 my first day and starting clearing the map of vehicles. It took time and practice, trial and error, to start seeing the payoff. And I'm like nobody statistically probably. What about the top ranked guys? Now here we see eye to eye. Sounds good to me. Nah we're not Infiltrators. But SOE has given Light Assault limited tools. We work good in squads, but not necessarily at fighting right NEXT to our squadmates. We're better as forward scouts, flanking assassins, and destroyers of bad tank drivers and stragglers. This is a huge nerf to Light Assault, I can't see it any other way.
Great point, you nailed it. Fighting air and tanks feel like a chore, not a rewarding gameplay experience. While USING tanks and air, are a blast. Devs, that is a problem.
Not sure what you mean by "mobile". All vehicles move way faster then even flying LA, this was never the issue. C4 is used against greedy or oblivious immobile farmers. I don't care what his vehicle top speed is, as long as he's standing still, whuch happens to Harassers and Lightnings just as it does to MBTs. Always used 2x C4 against Lightnings, don't see it as a problem in the slightest. And before you say "lawl" to killing aircraft, watch this. Naturally, C4 was nerfed since then, so it's more of a testament to old glory, but still gives food for thought. It will be if it goes live. Wait and see, ragnarok isn't coming just yet.
MBT users have a habit of standing still for long periods of time and shelling away like an artillery piece. Especially Prowlers, of course. Lightning users know they are more fragile and this isn't a smart thing to do. So yes, they generally stay on the move and run n' gun. Plus they accelerate way faster and can easily escape that C4 fairy. Sometimes an MBT driver will see me at the last second, and try to get away. But his poor acceleration lets me get the bricks on in time for a kill. I don't know why I'm having to even explain this. Why are you acting like this isn't a big change for LA? If the only thing I wanted to do was farm infantry, I would just play Heavy Assault like everyone else. I HATE Vehicleside man. This change is going to be the worst thing for the game.
I dunno, maybe I haven't thought about this, or just because this was never a problem for me. Where do you see me acting like that? I agree, if it comes live it will be a nerf. But I've been here long enough to know that just because it was announced as a possibility, doesn't mean it will certainly happen, and devs never were keen on listening to our feedback. If nerf is coming, we can't do anything to prevent, so we'll have to adapt. If nerf isn't coming then why panic? I hate when vehicles are used against infantry. Infantry vs infantry combat is what is interesting for me in this game, and this is the reason why I play LA. If I wanted to fight vehicles I'd play HA. You're exact opposite, you play LA because you hate vehicles. Interesting. 95% of my playtime as LA is spent fighting against infantry. The other 5% is me trying to get rid of enemy vehicles so I can fight against enemy infantry unmolested. I spend little of my playtime actually hunting vehicles, that is part of the reason I can be calm about this possible nerf. I went through four "I hate you PS2, I quit"-and-then-returning-sometime-later phases already. Eventually I accepted that this game is ****, and sooner or later it's going to die, and it's going to be ugly. I am at peace with this.
I don't play LA just to take on vehicles. But I learned pretty quickly in this game how worthless HA AV weapons were. You fire 5 rockets into a tank, and don't get a kill? That's freaking rubbish. But 2 C4 on a tank? Yeah, now we're cooking with gas man! High risk, high reward. Heavy Assault vs Vehicle is high risk, zero reward ever. I invite you to try it one night. You'll feel completely useless. It's only good for getting the last hit in on something that would be dead anyway. Like you said, they can OHK us with zero teamwork, but have this attitude that it should require a dedicated AV nest to kill them. Completely stupid gameplay imo. Well good for you, but I'm not there yet lol.
I quoted the wrong thread. I had to remake the one above due to all the idea's being removed. The right one (with the same opening post and 2 whole post filled with idea's below) in the link below. https://forums.station.sony.com/ps2/index.php?threads/long-past-due-la-update-remake.211154/
For the record good snipers will take out engineers repairing vehicles from afar. Many times however I find getting down there with the tanks and engineers to be more enjoyable. I would hardly say I "run" from vehicles. I cannot harm them per say but I like to think I'm helping. I really don't know what the solution is, but personally I wouldn't mind giving LA class "orbital strike" . Devs could not give this to infils 2 years ago because simply we could get right up into a group of tanks with little to no risk. I dont know if you have seen the old videos on orbital but it looked pretty nasty.
I know what they should do for the light assault take away its jet pack, light assaults destroy any sense of a battle, you cant operate as a unit because at any time 2 light assaults can jump a wall and c4 you, on top of that you cant stop moving because of snipers, and how lag compensation and hit detection works, they are buffing drifter jump jets and you ask for more? ps light assault isnt the only class with c4, and btw you don't hear heavy assaults saying you nefted my rocket launcher,
It is a job of a unit commander to deploy your Light Assault to prevent enemy Light Assaults from getting to you. Yes, we do, and we'll keep asking, because it is well deserved. The whole history of Light Assault is a slap in the face. That's because rocket launcher was **** against vehicles from the start. Rocket primary nerf, on the other hand, caused a long lasting **** storm.
