The easiest way would be to make it reload faster and half the damage. You cant just nerf the mortar and buff the RPG. lets see... Buff the rpg, nerf the mortar will result in nerfing the chainguns so u can hit the tanks in a direct line of sight without insta dying that results in stickys more deadly cause the riflemans dont die so fast too that will make tanks more powerfull in close quarter fighting that will make late game infantry cover futile and so forth You cant just cry to nerf something
I love the shooty Hmm no one wants the gren to become boring, so how do we manage this? What do you think how to balace it's reduced mobilty to still keep it an attractive class? Z100000M, please stop using that evil word "nerf", we dont want to nerf any more aspekts of the game i think - nerfing's always hated by the players using the weapons that got nerved... As far as i understand this thread is about changing the way of playing of the grenadier because I: he's not meant to be an infantry killer and II: that jumping behavior annoys most people - but we're not talking about nerfing the gren
How about taking his stamina down so he needs the stam up skill for it to be the normal length agian? That would make it so he needs stam up to bunny hop. And I disagree that hes not suppose to be an infantry killer. The mowtar is his anti-inf weapon. If hes not suppose to kill infantry then remove sticky's from rifles and buff the mowtar to kill buildings better.
Ya right but there are two things: 1. You probly got me wrong the mortar should be able to kill infantry the point is - and thats what i mean - it should not make the gren the no.1 inf killer 2. Reduced stamina wont stop that jump out bihind a wall - fire - jump back behavior as you got enought time to recover your stamina while reloading when you're save behin that wall again.
The problem with the mortar as anti infantry is that theres no average skilled mortar user to balance the weapon. From my experience you arent good at using it or you are. The average mortar user doesnt exist imo.
So you are demanding the mortar should be made more simple to use first? Howerver i think a person not able not use the mortar correctly wont simply use it so most grens you see on the field are skilled - or desperately defending their rax with the rpg
And thats why u see not enough grens ingame. How often rushed one team with regen apcs and won cause the defending team has like 3 grens out of a 20 man team.
I think the balance of the gren depends on the map type. Classic maps - Balanced Infantry maps - Overpowered. This is where the jump behind walls tactic happens.
Now as mentioned buffing it and get it deployable would be good. But on the point that apc rushes are to common, that's just because most players don't think. I usually am a grenadier at start of the game, choosing extra ammo, stack up mines and mine passages, like on sloughtred east passage as BE. Usually i single handedly stops light tank rushes with mines. So if more people actually put some more thought in to the gameplay and mined more areas apc and light tank rushes would not be as viable as they are now. The only reason these rushes work is because no one is a grenadier and no one lay down mines, missle towers don't cut it.
No, the problem is that it is possible to use skill to break the weapon at all. The mortar was designed as a stationary support and anti-structure weapon. The issue is that some people are able to exploit its properties to give it powers it wasn't intended to have. The solution is to make it deployable and stationary, so it can only be used for support. Additionally, it shouldn't be able to aim at anything nearby -- even moreso than it is now. Finally, and most importantly, mortar shots should travel much, much more slowly -- they should be among the slowest projectiles in the game. The mortar should depend on anticipating enemy attacks and shelling key areas; it shouldn't be a 'deathmatch' weapon. It should be totally ineffective against individual people. I believe that while you might recoil in horror from this idea right now, in the long run it is for the best. People will find new strategies to use the new mortar; they won't just use it like a lolbomb grenade launcher like they do now. The mortar should be more dependent on scouts to function effectively. In general, while you should be able to eyeball shots in a pinch, the 'optimal' mortar usage case should be to rely on the arty feedback map, and on designations from your comm, from scouts, or from sensor equipment. The fact is, most grenadiers right now will simply ignore scout targeting -- this is because their mortar is way too effective at 'eyeballing' shots, way too effective at short range, and the class as a whole is too oriented towards doing things themselves rather than support. The mortar should not be a primary anti-infantry weapon. We already have primary anti-infantry weapons all over the place. It shouldn't be a primary anti-tank weapon; that's the RPG. The mortar should be a support weapon, useful when the rest of your team is attacking so you can support them from behind cover, but useless when you have nobody to support. Mayama, you're being silly, and you know it. Hitting tanks with the RPG is quite easy -- I know, I play grenadier myself from time to time. Before tanks get good armor, it's not so hard to get kills. The problem is not chainguns; the problem is that the RPG is unable to effectively deal with armored tanks. The RPG upgrade fails to address this because 1) almost nobody researches it until too late, and 2) it still isn't strong enough to take out heavies effectively. The grenadier should not, though, have two close-range anti-tank weapons; after all, this would be problematic for a class that is supposed to be partially limited by their ammo. A grenadier shouldn't be able to say "Whoops, out of RPG ammo, I'll just switch to my mortar and use it like an RPG, against an oncoming tank!" That's silly. The weapons should be different, and have radically different usages; the RPG should be the weapon used against nearby opponents, while the mortar should be confined to supporting your teammates using the intel they gather to target shots. Likewise, the grenadier should not have two personal anti-infantry weapons. They have their pistols, which are decent enough now compared to other weapons; they do not need another anti-infantry weapon, really (as you said, you mostly use the shotty pistol yourself. It does fine.) The mortar should only be useful for support, not as duplicate for a weapon they already have. This will require some change to the way grenadiers can play; I know you don't think it'll be "fun" if you have to play them at all different from the way they are now. But in the long run, I think that having clearly-defined, drastically-different roles for their weapons will make for a more fun and interesting class and a more interesting metagame.
Hey batteling mayama is my job However that was a long post and i just read it in one stroke and only quick so correct me if you think i got anything wrong in whatever i'm going to say... I think you're speaking the truth about the current situation except to that point that the rpg-ugrade fails because it's researched too late. I have to say that what i found out was i would only go 4 rpg upgrade if i have to defend my base with not enough money to buy tanx - wich is not only kinda dumb as rpg upgrade is very expensiv itself, but also fails because if you plan on defending you nearly already lost the game. So there are hardly enough situations where it comes in handy and its even more difficult to predict those when its still not too late to start researching. About the mowta (back @topic) - i thought we already setteled to make it deploying, we just need to discuss how this is gonna be balenced now
Yeah but i meant in detail: Splash dmg (y/n) dmg buff (y/n) spread (y/n) using same ammo as rpg (y/n) and probably more, of course with real arguments behind, if possible
