I agree, it is the era of guided missile but gameplay must come first and if they are a problem, I have to find ways around it.
And yes, the railgun would be good, or the LMGs, they are capable to do damage to vehicles but they are so weak, nobody even tries to use them against it. Ever tried to kill a little bird with a LMG? Even if you hit every shot of all your magazines, I think you will do around 50 damage to it. It takes a fair amount of time of shooting, reloading and the effect isn't worth it.
So the tools are there, but somehow DICE is defending the vehicles with everything they can, they seem to not see a problem with them.
And yes, a modern flak would ve great... I loved the Fliegerfaust in BF5, because there we had the same problem, even without guided missiles. There, they finally gave a proper tool do defend as infantry, but DICE seems to not see any need in 2042 and I disagree strongly.
@Captain_TachiI am honestly Puzzled by how pampered the helicopters are in this game while the heavy armor vehicles are made to be rolling coffins that can be taken care of very easily by anyone who is willing to use the primate part of their brain
I'm on board with most of this.
Lock on weapons are a natural choice for a modern setting, but they don't lead to good gameplay. No one is saving clips of their sweet lock-on weapon kills. No one killed by a lock-on will feel it was an earned kill.
Lock-ons suck and 'direct hit' weapons like the G-84 and tank shells require near perfect netcode/connections for a consistent experience.
My preferred anti-air solution is flak/dumbfire rockets that rely on proxy detonation. Give me a BFV Fligerfaust or a Desert Combat Stinger.
