|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
3695
   |
Posted - 2013.09.05 18:48:00 -
[1] - Quote
Iron Wolf Saber wrote:nothing in the history of military warfare was ever designed to get shot at outside of two things, Decoys, and Practice Targets.
You're right! No tank has ever been designed to survive multiple hits from enemy weapons!  |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
3699
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 21:35:00 -
[2] - Quote
I'm sorry, IWS, I didn't think you'd take my comment about tanks being designed to resist firepower as tanks being designed to resist specifically anti-tank firepower.
The purpose of tanks is to make anti-infantry weapons obsolete. That was the reason they were invented, and their effectiveness at doing so is the reason they persist on the battlefield. Their presence as a weapon immune to small arms is the reason more powerful weapons were developed as a counter.
The point being that tanks on real battlefields exist specifically because they CAN handle a certain level of enemy firepower without it being a real concern for them. If you could just spray a tank with an AR and it fell over dead, nobody would waste the effort building them.
I'm actually surprised I got such a sensible reply, given the relative idiocy of what I was trying to say.  |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
3708
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 22:53:00 -
[3] - Quote
Iron Wolf Saber wrote:Stuff.
Two things to quote from my post that sum up my position perfectly...
Garrett Blacknova wrote:Their presence as a weapon immune to small arms is the reason more powerful weapons were developed as a counter.
Yep. Weapons got more powerful because of tanks. anti-infantry weapons, while not ideal, CAN hurt a tank. That doesn't mean tanks aren't capable of sustaining a lot of fire from them before suffering significant impairment.
Quote:I'm actually surprised I got such a sensible reply, given the relative idiocy of what I was trying to say.
And with an ending like that, I didn't deserve a reply. I'm going to bed now, thanks for playing (and yes, your point is a valid one, at least when talking about a real-world scenario like the one DUST isn't). |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
3729
|
Posted - 2013.09.06 00:04:00 -
[4] - Quote
Killar-12 wrote:But it would force the AR to be like a SMG where it excels in CQC but isn't as good outside of it's range
The current ARs are Gallente, and are based on Blaster tech, a form of hybrid weapon recognised as an effective SHORT RANGE weapon.
These ARs should, once we have the full range of rifles, be the almost-SMG option. |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
3729
|
Posted - 2013.09.06 00:07:00 -
[5] - Quote
Killar-12 wrote:Garrett Blacknova wrote:Killar-12 wrote:But it would force the AR to be like a SMG where it excels in CQC but isn't as good outside of it's range The current ARs are Gallente, and are based on Blaster tech, a form of hybrid weapon recognised as an effective SHORT RANGE weapon. These ARs should, once we have the full range of rifles, be the almost-SMG option. But should out DPS SMGs
They already out-DPS Small Blaster Turrets.
Just saying. |
|
|
| |
|