ARMORS: EU vs PAC.

[Skates]

Re: ARMORS: EU vs PAC.

Skates, what do you mean "bottoms out"??

It's in the word, due to extensive suspension travel the bottom touches the ground making the vehicle less manoeuvrable. Usually due to limited ground clearance.

Go to an empty server and go driving around on Suez, Verdun, or any other map where you don't stay on the road all the time. Take the same route with an EU FAV and then a PAC FAV. You'll notice the PAC FAV taking much more damage from the bumps and dips than the EU FAV. Might not be a big deal to some but I'd rather not lose vehicle health from just driving around. (Of course if you always stay on the roads it's not a big deal )

[Chris--My--azz]

Re: ARMORS: EU vs PAC.

It's Type 32 btw.

i thought so but i just copied the original post

[Lunien]

Re: ARMORS: EU vs PAC.

Go to an empty server and go driving around on Suez, Verdun, or any other map where you don't stay on the road all the time. Take the same route with an EU FAV and then a PAC FAV. You'll notice the PAC FAV taking much more damage from the bumps and dips than the EU FAV. Might not be a big deal to some but I'd rather not lose vehicle health from just driving around. (Of course if you always stay on the roads it's not a big deal )

Oh, that...yeah thats what i mean when I say that the PAC FAV feels bouncy - it just can't keep still and not take damage.

[Yoster]

Re: ARMORS: EU vs PAC.

You guys know nothing of the APCs...

EU APC > PAC APC.

I am still considering whether or not I should let you in on a (not so secret) tactic that only the EU APC and EU Tank can do.

Ok, fine, I'll tell you... You know how the Goliath is invulnerable to motion mines that hit it's front plate? So are the EU APC and EU Tanks. Just approach them with some speed, and they will all go *pow* on the front of your vehicle and do no damage.

WARNING: Don't you even think about trying this in a PAC Tank/APC, the rounded fronts still take damage

I always use this trick with the PAC APC. But I didnt know it worked on EU tanks. Which brings me to the conclusion on APCs PAC>EU because I always seem to get the pancake that is EU APC stuck on something. Of course PAC tanks are better for their forms. I prefer the PAC FAV, its just slicker and faster. Boyas fit me better than Lesrigs. Its more of an opinion on which fire style you like best, but shooting through fences is a downer.

[[1CD]K|2Lt.Wookimonsta]

Re: ARMORS: EU vs PAC.

one thing about the tanks, while in direct combat the PAC tank does have a considerable advantage, it is considerably weaker attacks from behind and groups of infantry.
1. it takes ALOT longer to fire backwards as you have to turn the whole tank
2. since you have to turn the whole tank, if you show up on a uav, enemy engineers will always know which way the entire tank is pointing, thus knowing when to pop up.
3. since it has no turret it is also kinda borked in a urban environment

so yeah, in one on one combat it has the upper hand, but you are also easier to pick off by engineers as it takes you for fkin ever to turn around

[Fingulfin]

Re: ARMORS: EU vs PAC.

Turn up your sensitivity and roadkill the buggers... Its not that hard

[DesmondLocke]

Re: ARMORS: EU vs PAC.

Ok, fine, I'll tell you... You know how the Goliath is invulnerable to motion mines that hit it's front plate? So are the EU APC and EU Tanks. Just approach them with some speed, and they will all go *pow* on the front of your vehicle and do no damage.

Question....are only direct front hits impervious to the MM? Or is there some fall-off from the sides too? Say you pull into a silo, and one hits mostly the front panel but maybe touches the side a bit too, what happens there?

[BandoIruka]

Re: ARMORS: EU vs PAC.

The other thing about the PAC walker I don't like is how a chunk of your view is blocked by your very own hip when you rotate your torso to the 3 o'clock and 9 o'clock positions. Infantry, such as a recon, can stand close to the side of the legs and is less visible to the walker pilot than if it was a EU walker instead.

EU tank also have a potential for 2 weakspots, the back of the turret. If someone is to do a 180 for the turret, it would have to 2 weakspots that can be struck from the front and rear. Having said that, the tank's design only goes to show that DICE wanted to award those who stay back and use the zoomable gun while punishing those who get too close and personal.

[Fingulfin]

Re: ARMORS: EU vs PAC.

Question....are only direct front hits impervious to the MM? Or is there some fall-off from the sides too? Say you pull into a silo, and one hits mostly the front panel but maybe touches the side a bit too, what happens there?

You die. lol, no, you only lose around 15 health per hit if they get you at a diagonal angle. Either way, you win.

[-Shifty-]

Re: ARMORS: EU vs PAC.

EU Tank/APC/Walker >ALL Doragon > All

I always use the less good stuff, and I always own better with them. Such as the Type 4 Doragon, I can own you pathetic Talon whores who think all your fancy moves and ADing works. Until you're good with the worst weapons n stuff you can't perform your best with other "Easy" weapons.

[Ctrl-Alt-Del]

Re: ARMORS: EU vs PAC.

Tsssk Brad, you have lost to learn...

Riesig>Apc=Pac Walker=Nekomata>Tiger>Buggehs

For air.

Argh in transport (inside joke)>Talon>Doragon>Transport

[Fingulfin]

Re: ARMORS: EU vs PAC.

EU Tank/APC/Walker >ALL Doragon > All

I always use the less good stuff, and I always own better with them. Such as the Type 4 Doragon, I can own you pathetic Talon whores who think all your fancy moves and ADing works. Until you're good with the worst weapons n stuff you can't perform your best with other "Easy" weapons.

So inexperienced... I don't think you understand.

Talon > Doragon > PAC Transport >= EU Transport (depends on alot of things)

No matter how "Ub3r 1337" you THINK you are in the Doragon, a medium skill Talon can make life for you HELL. Why? The Doragon has some EXTREMELY apparent faults, faults which kill it.

1(smallest fault): Not very Maneuverable or Fast.
2 (BIG fault): Missiles = Stupid. Check out the EA Website, the Doragon's description. They INTENDED for it to have dumbfire missiles... The current semi-seeking missiles are better than EA planned on them being. Because of this, I doubt EA will do any more gunship balancing.
3 (BIGGEST fault): Faulty Shields. 1/3 times the Doragon's shields malfunction and all the missiles go straight through and kill it.

I am a HUGE fan of the "Worst Weapons" (I use the Zeller, Clark-12, Smoke Nades, A8-Tiger and, yes, the Doragon), don't get me wrong... Its just that the Doragon is so handicapped no pilot who knows how a gunship should work (Talon) would WANT to be in it. With the Tiger, I can actually prefer to use it because in the right hands it works. Same with the Zeller and Clark-12... However no matter how "skilled" you are with ze Doragon, you are limited by its critical faults.