Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The case *for* anti-vehicle C4

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The case *for* anti-vehicle C4

    Engineer rocket launchers are all terrible at their anti-tank duties. I prefer C4. Here's why.

    Why using anti-tank launchers against tanks is a terrible idea:

    1. AT rockets are not 1-shot kill. This means you give up the element of surprise.

    2. AT rockets give off smoke trails and give the armor pilot visual cues: it's easy to find out where the rocket was fired from.

    3. Armor pilot can use destructible environments to his advantage once you've fired once: it's a lot tougher to stay alive.

    4. Once the armor pilot knows where you've fired from, he can adjust his best armor toward you, and back up toward friendlies ... oftentimes this results in a lot of +30 scores for you, but live armor.

    Why using C4 against tanks is a sexy idea:

    1. Tank turrets move slowly. This makes flanking/approaching/cuddling up to tanks easy.

    2. There are no magical infantry scanners on vehicles. In BF2142, you couldn't approach a piece of armor within 20 meters because you'd be spotted on an IDS. Not so in BC2: the scanner radius is tiny, and oftentimes armor pilots choose other vehicle perks.

    3. Flags are relatively close together. This means armor stops often to shoot at things. This means you can run up to it easily. This also means you can chase armor that's going somewhere else because, pretty soon, that armor will stop and shoot at something. Chasing down tanks is pretty easy.

    4. There is a lot of cover and very good concealment. As compared to BF2 and BF2142, BC2 is lush, and vegetation-infested. Soldier uniforms don't stick out like sore thumbs either. This makes getting to know tanks up close and personal easier.

    5. Two packs of C4 will take down any ground vehicle. Setting that C4 down is fast, inconspicuous and doesn't raise any alarms.

    6. Both Assault and Recon have C4, with a potential of 6 C4 packs / soldier. An infantry squad can keep its ammo from an assault, and keep its recon balls from a recon ... but what benefit does it get from an engineer? If it's a highly-mobile infantry squad, chances are, it won't benefit as much from an engineer.

    ---

    The short version of the above: C4 is faster, easier, and more reliable. Also way more sexy.

    Tips for using C4 against armor:

    1. Figure out what the tank is trying to shoot at, and predict what it's going to do in order to get in position. That way, you stay out of its field of view, and flank it nicely.
    2. 90% of the time, you have more to worry about the infantry around the tank, than you do about the tank itself. Run with your weapon in hand, not C4.
    3. If the engineer is repairing, shoot him first. If they see C4 on their tank beside their repair tool, they start freaking out and things go south real quick. Get rid of the engineer, and rely on him speaking slowly/VOIP lag to set down C4. If there's more than one engineer -- no worries. They often won't care about another body beside the tank. Use your best judgment.
    4. This is TG: suicide is against the rules. Out of the times you're SURE to have had a piece of armor, 40% will end up in you being shot at by a pistol or something silly like that. Accept that: play on the safe side. Do not hit that trigger too quick.
    5. C4 on top of most tanks does a lot more damage. If you can get above the armor and throw the C4, it works very well.
    6. Throwing C4 when on level ground attracts a lot of attention. Infantry will see you and shoot you down like the dirty audacious bastard you are. Act cool and blend in: run up to the tank, set 2 C4, run behind nearest cover, and blow it.
    7. Traps are a very poor idea: they're slow, inefficient, and C4 blows up when a tank shoots at it accidentally. Take initiative and go after it.

    Hope it helps. Happy exploding :)

  • #2
    Re: The case *for* anti-vehicle C4

    2. There are no magical infantry scanners on vehicles. In BF2142, you couldn't approach a piece of armor within 20 meters because you'd be spotted on an IDS. Not so in BC2: the scanner radius is tiny, and oftentimes armor pilots choose other vehicle perks.

    Actually there are! V Elect perk does that! Then again noone usually uses it over extra armor, altfire or optics. On top of all it doesn´t seem to work at all !

    So basically I´m just pissin around here making a useless post :)


    Well maybe not rly. Could couple Smoke Launchers with C4 attack for teamwork epicness and epic AARs.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: The case *for* anti-vehicle C4

      As it says, Lyra:

      in BC2: the scanner radius is tiny
      He's saying that V Elect is the dumb cousin of the BF2142 IDS

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: The case *for* anti-vehicle C4

        a couple of smoke nades to cover the recon with c4 works wonders on a tank thats sitting still and firing


        "Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something." -Plato
        "Whiskey, yet again, will have my babies." -TheSkudDestroyer


        Comment


        • #5
          Re: The case *for* anti-vehicle C4

          If more folks carried and utilized the tracer dart then recons would be free to plant their C4 in anti-personnel roles. I can be all the way across the map and still lock onto the dart.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: The case *for* anti-vehicle C4

            There is this amazing thing called 'driving in 3rd person'. When you are running up behind me, I can SEE you.

            There's a reason I never get in a vehicle in hardcore mode: You can't switch to the external view.




            "Cum bellum clamavit, nos respondivi..."


            "I've given everything I can... There are no heroes left in man..."

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: The case *for* anti-vehicle C4

              in the assualt tree, can you have a combo that is
              prototype
              40mm nade
              Specialization: Grenade Vest 67,600xp Description: Doubles your 40mm and hand grenade load.
              Specialization: Improved Demolitions 271,600xp Description: Increases the damage of solider carried explosives.
              and also C4 ?

              if so that's sexy !
              Last edited by Exploding_Silver; 03-15-2010, 02:44 PM. Reason: better details

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: The case *for* anti-vehicle C4

                Afraid not Silver. You can only choose one: The C4, or your 40mm grenade launcher. It's a toughie sometimes.

                I prefer the AT launcher because it gives me a bonus to Anti-Infantry/Long-range options. Nothing says "BOO YAH!" like a headshot from an RPG-7 across the map.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: The case *for* anti-vehicle C4

                  Originally posted by Exploding_Silver View Post
                  in the assualt tree, can you have a combo that is
                  prototype
                  40mm nade
                  Specialization: Grenade Vest 67,600xp Description: Doubles your 40mm and hand grenade load.
                  Specialization: Improved Demolitions 271,600xp Description: Increases the damage of solider carried explosives.
                  and also C4 ?

                  if so that's sexy !
                  You can't. Taking shotgun will give you C4 and that will replace any 40mm weapons. //axis beat me to it

                  On the topic: C4 is more effective when tank enters area it shouldn't, rockets are more of a long range weapons, supposed to suppress enemy armor and force it to pull back. With C4 you get 1 shot. In short, C4 is incredibly effective especially in conquest, but neglecting engineers as main anti-armor infantry isn't going to help the team much.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: The case *for* anti-vehicle C4

                    Not to mention that if you've got a good up-gunner in your tank, he/she should always be scanning your blind areas for sneaky C4 planters.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: The case *for* anti-vehicle C4

                      The case *against* anti-vehicle C4:

                      Many Zhohar's are lost due to their infatuation with C4. If this hazardous practice is not eliminated the Zhohar may quickly become an endangered species... not to mention the medic responsible for keeping the Zhohar alive.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: The case *for* anti-vehicle C4

                        He also gets your tank tracks sticky.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: The case *for* anti-vehicle C4

                          Many of us PR minded players have been doing it insurgent style, and just IEDing. More patience required, but damned more satisfaction, as very often if you don't move you are totally invisible!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: The case *for* anti-vehicle C4

                            HOW MUCH of a difference are u seeing in dmg with the explosive upgrade perk?
                            I tend to throw 3 c4 on everything and grab perk for 2x as many c4 when I am hoping to find vehicles.

                            I must say It is very easy to get killed when planting c4. I don't go out looking to throw them on the enemy tank and then blow myself up along with the vehicle, noone does. But If I'm about to go down anyways I'll blow that trigger before I can sprint outa range.
                            I can safely say I've killed ALOT of vehicles with c4, faaaaar more than with rockets. I've taken down 2 tg occupied vehicles in one click of the trigger resulting in 5 kills.
                            Anyone who has played with c4 enough has been killed by some enemy who saw U running up, throw the charges, then run like hell away from teh tank. I've done that and been taunted "haha #(*#& you couldn't get your c4 off. You #%#@%" No I'm blowing those charges rather than eat bullets. Deliberate suicide is one thing, NOT blowing charges when your about to die anyways is ridiculous. Anyone who can't see the difference is no kind of ally worth having.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: The case *for* anti-vehicle C4

                              Originally posted by Merc205 View Post
                              Deliberate suicide is one thing, NOT blowing charges when your about to die anyways is ridiculous.
                              Both are against the TG Primer.

                              Read up, sonny.

                              Comment

                              Connect

                              Collapse

                              TeamSpeak 3 Server

                              Collapse

                              Advertisement

                              Collapse

                              Twitter Feed

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X