You could delete C4 from the game entirely and it would instantly make it better

Which is the whole point that I was making.

Efficacy and ease of application.

If these are considered within what are seen as core aspects of the game, yet are not a hinderance to a solo player being able to adapt these principles while having a similar success rate to several players operating within similar confines, then theres a problem.

Its like ESF's. A LA with c4 can do the job just as well as 3 HA's with rockets. Its a similar variable proposition to an ESF being able to do everything while having a greater potential of getting away with it due to mobility, mobility being the single biggest winning attribute in PS2 in regards to surviving engagements.

Harassers can deal craptons of damage and get away with it for a cost of 150 and a gunner. ESF's deal craptons of damage with a solo pilot and 350 cost to potentially all targets. A single LA can deal a crapton of damage in a matter of seconds with ridiculous safety for how much?

I've heard the line "LA is minority class". Ostensibly that is true. But not in regards to experienced players. LA's are what people switch to to gib mbt's or sundys. And they do it solo. This operates outside of a core principle of Planetside.

I suggest an arming or preparation period, like actual c4, not the "F U" jack of all trades it currently inhabits. That way its use is more equivalent across the board.

I don't think this argument - that, if C4 were taken from LA, vehicles would all of a sudden be able to farm infantry with reckless abandon - holds water. There are so many things that kill vehicles when they are in CQC with infantry - rockets, tank mines, C4 thrown by units on the ground, MAXes. When a vehicle drives into a group of infantry, every experienced player knows it is doomed. And, in my experience, that doom rarely comes from a flying LA.

Personally I think that they should switch C4 to a Deployed item akin to a Motion Spotter or Engineer Turret. That way to place C4 you would have to stop, or at least be on the ground. You wouldn't be able to drop them while flying or moving fast. This would also help mitigate the use of C4 as a strictly better Grenade, and with all the changes to Construction with the addition of Siege weapons, we could make C4 more powerful against construction items and less powerful against Armor.

A Tank/Vehicle really should provide close infantry support, as is their role in war. But they cant do that when 5 of 6 infantry classes can instantly gib a tank with C4. I'd wager Tanks would get much closer into Infantry combat and urban situations if the chances of instant death were lower. I feel like Tanks sit back and shell bases because they CANT get close. I can take a few rockets, but I will nope right out of any situation where I think ill get C4d.

The only thing for me with C4 is that I find its currently a bit overly strong against max suits, particularly stationary TR max suits. To that end, I think the solution is the beef up max suits against C4. Otherwise, I don't really mind it being in the game as an excellent anti armour tool. It keeps tank players on their toes, and ensures that they can't just run hog wild all the time.

As an alternative to buffing C4 resistance on MAX suits, I could also see adding a sort of arming time and line of sight requirement to its usage. This makes it a lot less effective against infantry since it losses its grenade replacement status, but keeps its armour equalizer status.

Yet another idea would be to restrict or remove the fact that it is throw-able. This means infantry actually have to get close and then back off before detonating C4 unless its a suicide run, in which case they still have to get in close.

Overall, I do think C4 should stay, but not in the way it is now. Its just a bit too versatile for its own good given its power. However, I also can't really imagine light assault without it ( partly because I remember the days before they got the rocket rifle). Unless a significant set of changes ( Largely buffs) to their rocket rifle occur, I do think C4 is going to remain, for better or for worse.

I don't mind C4 as an anti-vehicle tool, that should be it's intended use. My problem is its use as an anti-infantry tool as well. it seems a little too powerful as both, and pretty cheap against MAXs. I would suggest nerfing it's blast radius but keeping its damage. It would still be a formidable weapon against vehicles yet not be so frustrating against infantry. It could still kill MAXs, but it would require more skill.

Oh yeah the 8+ rockets & reload time, over a single-shot to kill on said infantry, will totally keep the HE tank from sitting as close as it can.
Tank mines, same range as C-4 - on a ground-bound class, that has only direct land-routes.

C-4? On a flying unit, able to traverse any terrain, and get altitude above the tank's main gun..
That's infinitely more threatening by itself.
C-4 also doesn't leave time to leave via the superior speed of vehicles, with a long time to die; It is seconds once triggered.

If a vehicle has to directly drive into an entire group of infantry before it can experience doom..
That means it has to be beyond reckless, and get completely screwed, before it dies.

As well, if the Flying LA, wasn't the proper threat: Why exactly pin-point out C-4 on LA's, if C-4 As well wasn't a threat?
If C-4 was, they'd never suggest just removing it off LA's.

3 Heavies, can be handled & out-repaired easily, aren't using nanites, and are doing it more easily than the C-4.
Which is nanites-per-throw, close-proximity, and unlike the Rocket-launcher also has to be detonated after the throwing.
The arming time after throwing it? Oh so, how many seconds extra upon reaching & landing the C-4 onto the tank, with the superior armor, weapons, and speed, does it take, before the LA can finally press the fire button?
Is it the entire TTK on that LA, without any consideration for damage taken from the entire flight over there?
Is it half? Is it nearly? If it's any of the three, the LA is dead even if they get there.
And the Tank operator has the entire time advantage for the trip, and for the entire placement.
You need only kill the LA, and the entire C-4 isn't refunded at all, and rendered null.

That's kill it before, during, and if you had additional arming time; During the arming process.
That's an LA incredibly vulnerable, and nearly unarmed, sitting around an armed tank even if it's a solo-MBT driver, and has to survive all of that, and then the arming time.. to then destroy 1 tank.

That tank has to just shoot the LA, move, which voids the C-4, costing the LA nanites, or just have allies, a top-gunner, distance.. Or even hop out, and use the SMG or Carbine to rapidly kill the LA in the vulnerable flight, or as they drop it.
That arming time, would ensure the LA is dead to rights, making C-4 useless.

Until infantry can properly engage vehicles, without it being so far in the vehicle's favor, that they can be ignored to the last minute, C-4 is needed to prevent the vehicles from laughing at the threat of infantry.
An ESF unlike c-4, isn't short-ranged, nanite-cost-per-attempt-use, is single-shot, and exposes the LA to the entire capability of the enemy.
An ESF has multiple-weapon systems, self-repair, built-in-radar, built-in-boosters, the highest speed, grand mobility, and can even pack hard-counters to enemy weapon systems, in addition to effective weapons with high-ammo counts & low TTK.

It certainly ain't like C-4, on squishy target, foiled by motion.

2 points:

1: If you are clustered in a ball of infantry, you are going to do 1 thing . . . die. Either FF or the enemy will kill you as you are running in a ball hoping the meatshields infront and beside you will act as cover. Protip, they can for about 10 seconds at most until they are chewed apart by enemy defenses. 100 infantry needing to push sitting on 1 door will result in stalemate, plus you are all clustered in 1 area, perfect for a brick or grenade to take many people out,

2: Maxes need a counter. To counter a defensive max, you need to get to it first, then kill it. Without C4, this becomes insanely difficult for just one, not to mention 4 or 5 waiting for people to come through that door. Heavies will be shredded long before thhey can kill just 1, especially, if the MAX has an engi on him.

Really ppl complaining how unbalanced C4 would be when it got a trigger time...
Adding a valkery to the discussions how unbalanced it's capability is to drop people.
Second is totally off topic, please note valks have a a gun which will do the job as well.

Everyone is complaining a vehicle in cqc is doomed against an infantry crowd, why then complaining about C4 would be too strong there. A LA who made his way to a MBT in the middle of no where could get a +1 s trigger delay as he will stay unrevealed for that time. As well it is combined arms and he just could get an esf with hornets... Or harassar or a buddy who's joining him...

But what's about infantry vs LA with those presents? How many times did Ya yell in the voice chat LA and were dead when ending?
So why the **** not giving people time to react? Like C4 Brick, run and minimize the damage, would result in a kind of confusion added to a flash nade the LA is capable to flank.
Same for Max they cannot sit in the middle of no where they need to be in crowds, as well decreased damage against them would make them too durable when having a pocket engine. But flanking with flash and C4 needs to be able to kill them.

I suggest longer arming time, but the postibility to instant throw the second (up to fourth) brick and stickyness to max units.

My only dislike of C4 is when used as a super powerful anti infantry 'nade in CQC room fights/holding cap points. I do run it on LA, HA and Medic for situational and occasional use but I'm not a suicide bomber.

It is handy for tanks that insist on running right up to doorways so they can shoot in, unguarded sundies parked in bases, inattentive turret users and as a booby trap for Maxes running rampant through bases...............i.e. chancers and the reckless.

Honestly, I'm fine with C4 as it is. Sure, it can be a bit of a pain when you get killed with it, but honestly it's down to tactics.

If I'm a tank driver and I'm not either A) watching for C4 fairies or B) having my gunner watch for C4 fairies, then I've just let us both down. If I've positioned myself properly, I'll have plenty of warning time to spot and eliminate an enemy or else run away before my Vanguard gets turned into a twisted pile of scrap freedom. If I make the mistake of positioning myself near cover that a C4 fairy or other infantry can use to get to me (For example, a tall rock or a building) then I have only myself to blame. And as someone else said, it discourages vehicles from camping right on top of bases. A tank that is further out is far easier to deal with than a tank that is right on top of you if you're not using C4.

On the MAX argument or even C4 vs. infantry, I again feel it's down to tactics. Granted, I have been known to troll with the C4. A great way to farm kills is to find an enemy team holding the point at a tech plant and attack with a LA bearing C4, the Piston, and the Sensor Shield implant. The C4, your grenades, and the implant give you the chance to pop up over the wall, bag a few kills, and escape to reposition yourself and attack from a different angle. The shotgun will let you dive in once you've softened up the enemy with some explosives and mow down three or four before escaping once more to attack from the other side. But this tactic has its flaws as well. If the enemy, be they MAXes or infantry, can easily avoid you by keeping an eye on the walls around the point. Often times when I do this little dance I'll find a few skilled players who will start watching for me while their less-alert buddies will keep obliviously plinking away through the openings in the walls. This turns it into a game of whack-a-mole, usually with the mole (me) getting a faceful of communist lead or cultist laz0rs to the brainpan as I realize my critical error and try to retreat. The moral of the story is that a LA that is coming at you with C4 is a threat, but it's one that you can easily eliminate before it gets to you by being aware of your surroundings, keeping a good team with you, and using some basic pattern recognition and forethought. For example, if you're fighting in a triple stack and know that enemy LAs could get a C4 brick through the window, STAY AWAY FROM THE WINDOW. Take a few steps back and continue to fire through the window at more distant targets. This way if a LA gets a brick of 'splody magic through the hole you at least have a chance to either take him out before he detonates it or else back the hell up and not get blown to shreds.

Some people seem to think that if they get killed suddenly by C4 in a tank it's always a random solo type, but is the purpose of teamwork not to appropriately apply your resources against the enemy?

If i'm in a squad and the leader is just making everyone move in an unkillable mass because we have 40-60% Medics I find that really disappointing. I'd rather it be "4, 7 take you're LAs low around the North flank of that armour keep behind those hills, the rest of you, I want you to distract them, pepper them with small arms and the occasional rockets, let them know you're there."

See this is how things worked in actual wars. Flanking the enemy while it was engaged in battle and distracted, just because you die suddenly to C4 doesn't mean it was some lone yahoo who wasn't involved in the fighting.

As for MAXes honesty I've never certed into them, why would you? Burn over 50% of your nanites to be marginally stronger than other infantry units while simultaneously painting a giant bulls eye over your face.

Even if they removed C4 they're still a massive draw for enemy fire. Now that probably changes if you have maxed small arms resistance, which would probably be quite common and OP if no one could kill you easily with explosives (no lock on launchers, most dumbfires will miss or glance, Explosive bolt crossbow is weak AF) Not sure which if either the Archer falls under though.

What I'm reading sort of amounts to "LA's have a function that they're really good at and I don't like that."

You mention the Harasser 150 Nanites (same as 2 C4) but you neglect that a Harasser can be soloed with only moderate drop in effectiveness. Especially if being used to hunt sunderers. I've got buttons on my mouse that will move me from driver to gunner and vice verse I can roll up and be firing before the vehicle comes to a halt. If I have a Halberd on it's moderately effective against enemy armour too.

As for the complaint that a solo enemy hits the armour/sunderer see my other comment (should be just above).

Its not everyday that one sees self-outing like this.

I think C4's could come in two different forms. Brick and Satchel.

A Brick would essentially be the current C4 but weaker. Say you reduce the damage so you carry 3 or 4, but they total their damage to what the two current ones can do. Cost would remain the same if 3, a bit lower when 4. You can throw these willy-nilly.
The Satchel however does a bit more then twice the damage of the current one. But you can carry only one (or two if you are an engineer and have the proper suit unlock) AND it has to be placed. Meaning you have to be close to something, see the little ghost image turn green for a viable spot, and then physically attach it to the target.

The brick has the same total output per fully loadout as now. But takes a bit more time, thus giving more of a counter option. The Satchel is more niche. It can nuke ANYTHING in the game, regardless of their setup. But you have to get REAAAL close or have the planning capacity to set it up as a trap.

With the addition of Rocklet rifles, LA's have a bit too much AV capability for my liking. To be fair, I'll admit that I despise the class with an incandescent rage and disgust.

Engies:
Have archer, capable of melting maxes in several shots from render range,
or use laser sight for easy cqc max kills,
Also have AT mines that instakill maxes...
Also have AVON turret which kills maxes in several shots and is pinpoint accurate.

Heavies:
Have rocket launchers and grenades that kill maxes in several hits,
the combination of both is easy and results in instant death for the max

EVERY CLASS:
Has access to explosive crossbow which kills a max in 6 shots.

Or hell just run over the max with a freaking quadbike...

Max has plenty of viable counters, c4 is just disgustingly over the top.
Thrown across the room like a grenade and it'll oneshot even if it lands nowhere near them.
Disgustingly OP.

If the tank is only facing a single infantryman, then yes, I think that single infantry should be at a massive disadvantage versus a *tank*.

Great, that conforms perfectly with my suggestion to remove it from LA.

Are you suggesting that the only way a tank can be killed is by driving into a group of infantry? Because I can assure you there are many other ways to die in a tank, even while being careful.

I think I covered that pretty thoroughly in my first post.

I'm curious what people think SHOULD kill tanks. They dont like it when they get C4. They dont like it when ESF kill them. They dont want rocket launchers to kill them.

Already its ridiculously hard to kill tanks which is why every battle is surrounded by hesh tanks.

On the other hand its ok for them to sit and farm infantry with HE rounds because they spent resources that they get for free.

In my book, any vehicle that carries weapons should have the potential to kill an MBT, along with any infantry equip-able weapon that makes sense to be able to kill a tank ( such as C4, rockets, mines, etc).

A number of people seem to get this idea that being in a tank should automatically make you invulnerable. With enough skill, experience, common sense, and a bit of luck, a tank can be that, but they should never be that way just because they exist. Similarly, resource cost is not a good justification for being invulnerable. The use of resources should give potential power, not guaranteed power.

And keep in mind, this is coming from someone who really likes playing ground vehicles, including tanks, and does so regularly in game.

"Ridiculous safety"? Really? They're infantry; shoot them.

"But I didn't see him coming! It's not fair that I didn't get to fight back!" Yeah, well, it's not fair that an ESF rocket-podded me, or a tank shelled me from maximum render distance, or a Harasser roadkilled me. How am I supposed to counter-play that? A Light Assault you can at least stop if you're paying attention.

Liberators, AT tanks, AT Harassers to name a few.
Just not the low-skill free dime-a-dozen infantry who already rule the game lol.

Although suggesting infantry pull an AV vehicle to fight farmers might as well be asking if they know how to speak martian.