Neither of those give higher damage to the super low power RPGs / shaws in bf3. If they did then tanks wouldn't bore everyone off the game. LOL
Those perks just mean that engineers have an extra bunch of rockets to spend even more game time shooting a tank , only to die from tank while the engineer repairs that tank as you respawn with your extra rockets again XD
"Fancy a game of BF3?"
"no thanks. I like shooting and running around and objectives ....not spending games blowing up constantly respawning super tanks which when eventually taken out via 10rockets as that engineer we just killed was repair tooling it , are back in the same place 2 mins later to do it all again and again and again spending all our time dealing with those rather than having a fun game "
Flack reduces damage from all explosives. Squad Flack gives it to all of your squad. The tanks shell has low splash damage to begin with.
Only takes two rockets to destroy a tank. I took an RPG hit that disabled the tank from full health in that match I recorded. I had reactive armour on but the RPG hit an area not covered by it, the second shot hits the side but on the reactive armour and does no damage other wise I would of been dead. As you can see in the tanks HUD after the first hit all 3 panels are still there after the second the right panels are no longer shown on the HUD.
That red outline marks the reactive armour. Hit inside then that shot won't do any damage to the tank and the next hit will damage the tank, hit outside then you will do damage.
Plus low splash damage you can run around the tank quicker than the turret can turn, the reload is 5 seconds. They're not overpowered you're just soft.
Also your attitude and the way you approach the game is all wrong. One infanteer can't go it alone, just as in real life the infantry still need the cavalry. Battlefield is much than you think it is. To appreciate a great piece of art you have to stand back and take in the whole picture. Sort of the same with BF3 You play one set style all the time rather than being able to adapt and be more flexible as your stats show.
Also from the first press release onwards you've had nothing but negative things to say about the game, so is it any wonder you don't like the game. You went into it already thinking its unbalanced, every one using vehciles are *****'s or other wise exploiting the strengths. Then lets not forget you spurn any advice given to you by players who have vastly more experience in the game (and series). Don't bite the hand that feeds you
Anyways going off topic I was in a few games and 3 people were constantly using the USAS with frag round, next map shows as Op Metro. My first thought was "oh for duck sake, not metro with these divs" turned out to be one of the best Metro games I have in while. A few colonels joined the game on our side we were struggling to get to B. Our Colonels whipped out their USAS frag machines of death to fight fire with fire. I only have the the frags on the MK3A1 which is terrible unless your very close in which case its super awesome with frags .......erm or so I hear..... Anways I wasn't having much luck with it so brought out the USAS with buckshot. And what a game. Really good end to end stuff which is really odd for Metro as one team nearly always steam rolls the other but this we had the flags, they had them, we had them, they had them and so on
US 0 - 41 Russia
Usually 0 - 141 minimum
Full of medics camping with LMG's and assault guys with C4 everywhere blowing up MCOMS etc, BF3 is far superior.
BF3 still has the super retarded LMG issue(extended mags/scope/silencer on an M240.....seriously?!) but at least those support noobs cant heal or ressurect people while laying down 200 rounds into a doorway.
Haha. Don't worry youll be able to read my posts in threads about games that I feel aren't massively unbalanced to the point of boring me.
Eh? So you only post about games you feel are balanced? Wait - what? That's not the impression I was getting... Oh, double negative - you are a fickle mistress.
The irony is, instead of moaning about tanks, you could have legitimately moaned about gunships, but I guess you haven't played enough to experience that pleasure...
I think he enjoys the attention tbh, save your breath.
But who's worse here?
He finally goes to another board to complain about another game and someone makes a thread here linking to that thread. For what purpose? Just to lure him back for another tanks are overpowered and rockets aren't doing enough damage to them pointless debate.
The game doesn't meet my standards and as such I'm done with it ATM. There's really no reason to talk or even make threads about me.
It is true. As much as I would like to poke a hot poker (an extremely hot poker may I add) at Trollburst before preceding to cast him away into a very dark place of the forums never to be seen again, I do find that his comments bring an air of laughter to the BF3 boards.
Hence why he has been nominated for the forums funniest member. You go Cloudy! Knock 'em dead with your divine knowledge and experience of BF3.
It's like trying to teach a blind person about colours - there's always the tantalising lure that you will be the one to have a break through and make them see the light....
He gave me some tips, and taught how best to play rush (I've always liked search and destroy) and came to love the mode in BFBC2.
So dont get me wrong, I love the core Battlefield gameplay.
It's just that Bf3 is a poor representation of the franchise.