| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 200 300 400 500 |
9041. To Those Who Believe Large Blasters Are CQC - in General Discussions [original thread]
Benjamin Ciscko wrote: Yes and I backed over a madrugar and instapopped literally in half a second I dropped all of his armor. If missiles were meant for armor tanks they would have more PG they should not be superior to the blaster in tank ba...
- by Atiim - at 2013.12.04 03:51:00
|
9042. To Those Who Believe Large Blasters Are CQC - in General Discussions [original thread]
Lurchasaurus wrote: hint.....shotguns shoot to 50 yards...... unless you have a 120mm canister shot.....that b.itch goes to 500 meters point being, a close range gun goes farther if its freaking huge I'm going to assume that your either a...
- by Atiim - at 2013.12.04 03:40:00
|
9043. To Those Who Believe Large Blasters Are CQC - in General Discussions [original thread]
Lurchasaurus wrote: Atiim wrote: Lurchasaurus wrote: /facepalm So this made ma laugh harder than I have in months. This post certainly notifies me of a serious problem, but its not with the turret.... Well, I'm glad your mother is la...
- by Atiim - at 2013.12.04 03:36:00
|
9044. To Those Who Believe Large Blasters Are CQC - in General Discussions [original thread]
Lurchasaurus wrote: /facepalm So this made ma laugh harder than I have in months. This post certainly notifies me of a serious problem, but its not with the turret.... Well, I'm glad your mother is laughing about a broken game mechanic. Bu...
- by Atiim - at 2013.12.04 03:32:00
|
9045. To Those Who Believe Large Blasters Are CQC - in General Discussions [original thread]
Xocoyol Zaraoul wrote: All large turrets on Installations DO NOT have the same range as HAV Turrets , there is a large difference between a kilometer-aware turret Blaster Installations and some HAV Blaster with a 40 meter optimum where any...
- by Atiim - at 2013.12.04 03:28:00
|
9046. To Those Who Believe Large Blasters Are CQC - in General Discussions [original thread]
True Adamance wrote: And? You implied that my death was warranted because I didn't react in time, when it was far from. That, or I'm misreading your post.
- by Atiim - at 2013.12.04 03:24:00
|
9047. To Those Who Believe Large Blasters Are CQC - in General Discussions [original thread]
knight of 6 wrote: Atiim wrote: knight of 6 wrote: is the assault rifle a cqc weapon? they are both blasters. why the kitten would you have a cqc weapon on a tank? "I really wanna utilize those tight corners and the natural agility of th...
- by Atiim - at 2013.12.04 03:21:00
|
9048. To Those Who Believe Large Blasters Are CQC - in General Discussions [original thread]
True Adamance wrote: Atiim wrote: True Adamance wrote: LOL yup now you know what its like being WTFpwned by and invisible something..... oh the sweet justice! Its event better that it was a blaster turret. Yeah, except HAVs have enough...
- by Atiim - at 2013.12.04 03:21:00
|
9049. To Those Who Believe Large Blasters Are CQC - in General Discussions [original thread]
True Adamance wrote: LOL yup now you know what its like being WTFpwned by and invisible something..... oh the sweet justice! Its event better that it was a blaster turret. Yeah, except HAVs have enough time to turn on hardners and nitrous to...
- by Atiim - at 2013.12.04 01:00:00
|
9050. To Those Who Believe Large Blasters Are CQC - in General Discussions [original thread]
knight of 6 wrote: is the assault rifle a cqc weapon? they are both blasters. why the kitten would you have a cqc weapon on a tank? "I really wanna utilize those tight corners and the natural agility of the HAV to it's advantage" so... this w...
- by Atiim - at 2013.12.04 00:47:00
|
9051. To Those Who Believe Large Blasters Are CQC - in General Discussions [original thread]
Foundation Seldon wrote: So a couple things hilariously wrong about this thread. 1. Your antagonistic attitude really is doing you no favors, it's one thing to be smug and quite another to be smug and wrong. 2. Your picture doesn't qualify ...
- by Atiim - at 2013.12.04 00:42:00
|
9052. To Those Who Believe Large Blasters Are CQC - in General Discussions [original thread]
Benjamin Ciscko wrote: You do know you can strafe a blaster by walking left or right, it can't track you fast enough unlike rails which can hit a moving LAV twice in quick succession so you finally got a turret to shoot at you and ran as far as...
- by Atiim - at 2013.12.04 00:36:00
|
9053. To Those Who Believe Large Blasters Are CQC - in General Discussions [original thread]
Benjamin Ciscko wrote: Atiim wrote: Yes, but some are under the impression that it is quite literally impossible to use a Blaster in anything outside of CQC. This mean's that it is quite possible, and with a little bit of elbow grease and ...
- by Atiim - at 2013.12.04 00:32:00
|
9054. To Those Who Believe Large Blasters Are CQC - in General Discussions [original thread]
DUST Fiend wrote: Turret AI OP Go take a Blaster Maddy into a fight at 550m and tell me how that works out for you Yes, but some are under the impression that it is quite literally impossible to use a Blaster in anything outside of CQC....
- by Atiim - at 2013.12.04 00:19:00
|
9055. To Those Who Believe Large Blasters Are CQC - in General Discussions [original thread]
What distance qualifies as CQC? Are you saying this to defend your precious HAVs? What drugs are you smoking, and may I please have some? If you thought 400m was bad, then what is 550m? Yeah, I bet you didn't know that Large Blasters even had ...
- by Atiim - at 2013.12.04 00:12:00
|
9056. TANK combat. - in General Discussions [original thread]
Foundation Seldon wrote: Atiim wrote: True Adamance wrote: Can we not just agree to removed the LARGE ******* BLASTER that's what you hate about HAV not the other turrets. I think the Large Blaster turret could use some adjusting, but ...
- by Atiim - at 2013.12.04 00:00:00
|
9057. TANK combat. - in General Discussions [original thread]
Alpha 443-6732 wrote: Stop referring to the OP, it's pretty clear that he's a potato. Also, there is no point to even using combat vehicles if infantry have the best infantry killing weapons AND the best AV weapons. Once again, STOP LOOKING A...
- by Atiim - at 2013.12.03 23:49:00
|
9058. Why a low average TTK bad. - in General Discussions [original thread]
Rowdy Railgunner wrote: Text Grant wrote: Just reduce every weapon by 10% and maybe medium range weapons by 12 or 13%. The point of this game is long TTK to make it different from EVERY OTHER SHOOTER. All a long TTK will do is make less an...
- by Atiim - at 2013.12.03 23:27:00
|
9059. dust 514 & ps4 - in General Discussions [original thread]
DJINN leukoplast wrote: I haven't played Dust for a little while now, and am done with it for the time being. However when, and if, they get on PS4, I will probably take another look at it if it seems decent enough by then. The game still has p...
- by Atiim - at 2013.12.03 23:15:00
|
9060. dust 514 & ps4 - in General Discussions [original thread]
Dust will survive to the PS4. Just look at EvE Online, people said CCP was gonna fail, and now look at it. As for the racial variants, I expect them to come around 1.8 or 1.9, but no later than 2.0 Just look at the DEV Blogs for 1.7. This is en...
- by Atiim - at 2013.12.03 23:14:00
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 200 300 400 500 |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |