Recent Posts
SeC Gaming
the Lounge
New Lounge Topic
New Gaming Topic
We've moved to Discord

You are not connected. Please login or register

MBT LAW really needs a nerf

5 posters

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

1MBT LAW really needs a nerf Empty MBT LAW really needs a nerf 2013-11-27, 21:45

Ante

Ante

Topic.

Its biggest problem is that it reloads WAY too fast. And I really hope it's some weird bug, but the fact that active protection does absolutely nothing against it is ridiculous. Low skill, low risk, high reward weapon. wtf DICE.

Artimise Flare

Artimise Flare

Yep, at first I was really annoyed at how weak this weapon was. Now running around as a tanker, the damn thing is ridiculously powerful.

Balance idea's could be

- Increase reload time
- Make it so that smoke screen makes it so that the rocket can't "detect" the tank and flys on by unless it's a direct hit
- Make it so that active protection actually...um...you know..PROTECT the damn tank
- Perhaps give engineers less of them?

A single engineer may not be able to kill you very easily, but 2 or maybe 3 engineers with these things, and you'll get decimated in short order. Really really really annoying.

StormEye

StormEye

I wouldn't say high return, but consistent reward.

But I understand the hate on this thing as a driver of something, and have personally used it in a WAY~ too effective way.

Just have two dedicated MBT LAW engineer who have decent shot, and you can down a tank in two barrage. That takes, what, 5 seconds? Its ridiculous.

And its not that engineers are useless unless they are fighting vehicles. Thanks to DICE listening to idiots playing engineer only for the sheer comfort of having anti-vehicle measure that was getting murdered by anti-personnel classes, buffed this class way too much. And now that it seemed the class is nerfed with PDW only, in fact, they are now even more versatile with being able to choose ultra CQC PDW, absolute versatility carbine, long range replacer DMR, fuck vehicles and BF combat system MBT LAW, and reliable RPG.

And the extension of the flippin MBT LAW is Staff Shell. What the fuck is this crap? This thing should be completely removed from the game. It removes any "combat" in vehicular combat. Just spam this ultra straight firing weapon that will auto track enemy tank that will also load incredibly fast.

Artimise Flare

Artimise Flare

StormEye wrote:I wouldn't say high return, but consistent reward.

But I understand the hate on this thing as a driver of something, and have personally used it in a WAY~ too effective way.

Just have two dedicated MBT LAW engineer who have decent shot, and you can down a tank in two barrage. That takes, what, 5 seconds? Its ridiculous.

And its not that engineers are useless unless they are fighting vehicles. Thanks to DICE listening to idiots playing engineer only for the sheer comfort of having anti-vehicle measure that was getting murdered by anti-personnel classes, buffed this class way too much. And now that it seemed the class is nerfed with PDW only, in fact, they are now even more versatile with being able to choose ultra CQC PDW, absolute versatility carbine, long range replacer DMR, fuck vehicles and BF combat system MBT LAW, and reliable RPG.

And the extension of the flippin MBT LAW is Staff Shell. What the fuck is this crap? This thing should be completely removed from the game. It removes any "combat" in vehicular combat. Just spam this ultra straight firing weapon that will auto track enemy tank that will also load incredibly fast.
Yep, Engineer = God class all over again.

There is some serious balancing issues with these weapons right now. Though I have no idea how they would balance them. Perhaps make it so that that "tracking" explosion thing requires a lock on otherwise it's just a straight flying rocket that has a fast reload?

Ante

Ante

I'm guilty of using the STAFF shell, but only because if I don't I'll just be on the receiving end of it. It definitely needs a lower ammo count, 5 shells is way too much. How about 3? And make the reload time a lot longer. Could also lower the damage to 15-20 against heavy armor instead of 25.

StormEye

StormEye

I think the reload and ammo count for guided shell and staff shell should be exchanged.

Guided shell being as useless, as it is right now, need some buff. And staff shell getting guided shell properties will basically net them as early first shot advantage, but not continuous barrage of death.

This should solve things rather nicely, now that I think about it.

For MBT LAW, it really needs to be low risk, low return. It does constant 25+ damage which will down anything in more or less 4 shots. 4 shots with the reload time will make it 5 second survival time for anything with two engineers using it (as I have mentioned above) and make it four engineers for an instant death.

There really is no way to balance this thing without completely crippling it.

Reduce damage, and it becomes near useless on people that generally play alone.
Reduce ammo carrying will still enable it to be effective, since you don't have to barrage it just by yourself.
Requiring lockon for top tracking will just make it Javelin, and it overlaps the purpose of the launcher. (but still this is the best one out of possible nerfs)

But, I also have a feeling that just by fixing active protection, many of the rants will just disappear as MBT LAW actually will be neutralized with it.

Artimise Flare

Artimise Flare

StormEye wrote:I think the reload and ammo count for guided shell and staff shell should be exchanged.

Guided shell being as useless, as it is right now, need some buff. And staff shell getting guided shell properties will basically net them as early first shot advantage, but not continuous barrage of death.

This should solve things rather nicely, now that I think about it.

For MBT LAW, it really needs to be low risk, low return. It does constant 25+ damage which will down anything in more or less 4 shots. 4 shots with the reload time will make it 5 second survival time for anything with two engineers using it (as I have mentioned above) and make it four engineers for an instant death.

There really is no way to balance this thing without completely crippling it.

Reduce damage, and it becomes near useless on people that generally play alone.
Reduce ammo carrying will still enable it to be effective, since you don't have to barrage it just by yourself.
Requiring lockon for top tracking will just make it Javelin, and it overlaps the purpose of the launcher. (but still this is the best one out of possible nerfs)

But, I also have a feeling that just by fixing active protection, many of the rants will just disappear as MBT LAW actually will be neutralized with it.
Well the Javalin doesn't need you to PLD the tank in order to get the top down attack anyway, though it does require you to maintain a lock (which is retarded).

The PLD requirement would force engineers to work in conjunction with recons if they want a guaranteed hit, and if they lose that lock make it so that the missile can't "re-acquire" if they lock on again.

Metalzoic

Metalzoic

Let me get this straight:

You have a tank. Which is impervious to bullets. That can kill any soldier in 1 shot and it doesn't even have to directly hit them. That can also switch to a machine gun nearly instantly. That can also have another gunner helping. That moves faster than a soldier can sprint. And that you can bail out of at any time you choose with full 100% health if it does get damaged...

But you feel that a launcher which takes 5 shots to kill a tank and generally a combined effort from multiple enemies to be dangerous, should be nerfed?

Grey

Grey

Metalzoic wrote:Let me get this straight:

You have a tank. Which is impervious to bullets. That can kill any soldier in 1 shot and it doesn't even have to directly hit them. That can also switch to a machine gun nearly instantly. That can also have another gunner helping. That moves faster than a soldier can sprint. And that you can bail out of at any time you choose with full 100% health if it does get damaged...

But you feel that a launcher which takes 5 shots to kill a tank and generally a combined effort from multiple enemies to be dangerous, should be nerfed?
All this.

10MBT LAW really needs a nerf Empty Re: MBT LAW really needs a nerf 2013-11-27, 23:50

StormEye

StormEye

It takes 4 shots to kill in most situation.

Auto track on a tank that does not require any form of standing out in open.

Fires pretty much in straight line.

Once fired, its near guaranteed hit.

Armoured vehicles are not just there for kill whoring, but its a form of defense breacher to open up breaking points in enemy defense. You are running into fire that has near guarantee chance of getting blown up. Its not the simple "oh the tank is so powerful, and people still bitch about it" factor here.

11MBT LAW really needs a nerf Empty Re: MBT LAW really needs a nerf 2013-11-27, 23:52

Artimise Flare

Artimise Flare

It's not so much that, it's that there is NO defense against it. Just about every other type of AT you have a counter for, the MBT LAW you have none, other than LOS.

It reloads the fastest, is basically a fire and forget rocket, so long as it gets near the tank it's a 100% guaranteed 20-25 points of damage, regardless of countermeasures.

None of the other launchers give you this much power. I don't care if it's easy to use so long as there are ways for me to mitigate the damage it does. As it is right now, you can't do anything but eat the damn rocket.

So yes, it needs to be nerfed or at least tweaked to be more in line with the other AT launchers.

Do you drive tanks a lot metal? I'm not sure how it is on console, but on PC, the damn rockets are annoying as fuck.

Kill me with an RPG, or any other AT and I'll say GG, you out played me, the MBT LAW however takes a great deal of the skill out of he equation IMO, since you don't have to compensate for really much of anything.

As Storm said, the balance between risk/reward is skewed with this thing IMHO.

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum