DUST Search - Blaster tanks are horribly unbalanced and the chief source of Infantry frustration.

KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote:

Takahiro Kashuken wrote:

So a tank cannot have a turret which kills infantry effectively but yet infantry can have a weapon like the FG which can easily kill tanks/infantry effectively???

Double standards much?

Frankly its not my fault if everyone is assault and im in a tank, i pick the tank for the situation and blaster has served me well and if im getting high kill counts then whos fault is it?

You have thousands of HP, resistances, and hardneners. You can kill infantry waaaaay faster than they can kill you, and that is IF they can kill you at all considering how fast you can escape. Infantry can only hurt you if they make significant sacrifices in their anti-infantry capabilities, which makes themselves further vulnerable. You can pretend using a blaster tank is the same kind of tradeoff and say blasters are totally ineffective against railgun and missile tanks, but I've seen blaster tanks come out on top in a tank fight (my brother is a tanker). Don't pretend its somehow equivalent.

No one is saying tanks should never be able to effectively kill infantry, but ever thought there is such a thing as too effective?

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Our Deepest Regret L.O.T.I.S. Public Disorder. 418	Posted - 2013.12.20 09:57:00 - [1] - Quote The current level of tank sustainability is, in my opinion, perfectly fine. You can now fit your tank to be a fragile, but powerful glass cannon or a highly defense-oriented mobile fortress designed to resist damage and keep you alive. A lot of players prefer the latter, giving rise to what infantry have termed unkillable tanks. Whatever, it's a tank. If its owner has maximized the survivability of his rig and spent his SP appropriately, then who are you to complain? If we want the maximum defense possible, then your complaints about us being hard to kill mean we've done our job correctly. Besides, Missile tanks are not going to rack up any obscene body counts. So what do you care if you can't swarm it to death? And Rail tanks aren't going to rack up any obscene body counts either. So what do you care if you can't swarm it to death? Also, Blaster tanks aren't going to...oh uh. Um...uh... Yeah, about those Blaster tanks. CCP, even with a lowly militia turret, blaster tanks are effective against infantry to the point of being a broken mechanic. Blaster tanks are average against other tanks but OBSCENELY POWERFUL against infantry. They stand no chance. It isn't fair in the slightest, and it isn't fun. If the driver sees you, you are dead, and that is that. I hold no grudges against a rail gun or missile tank that kills me when I play infantry. That is proof of skill in the case of the rail gunner, and luck in the case of the missile tank. But Blasters are a different story entirely. By combining a tank's high defense with the most unbeatable infantry slayer in the game, it feels like nothing less than a cheap exploit, and it really needs to be looked at. People are blindly calling for a nerf on tanks in general, when in fact, it is this very specific sort of tank (blasters) that is causing all the trouble. The blaster turret is problematic and needs to be looked at. It is entirely too effective.
Arkena Wyrnspire Turalyon 514 Turalyon Alliance 6497	Posted - 2013.12.20 09:57:00 - [2] - Quote Ssh, you'll upset the tankers. Level 6 Forum Warrior Lenin of the glorious armoured revolution Gallente FW - 'Turalyon'
Our Deepest Regret L.O.T.I.S. Public Disorder. 418	Posted - 2013.12.20 09:59:00 - [3] - Quote Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: Ssh, you'll upset the tankers. I am a tanker. I love tanks. I can't sit there and pretend I'm not seeing what I'm seeing, though.
MINA Longstrike 2Shitz 1Giggle 173	Posted - 2013.12.20 10:31:00 - [4] - Quote Wait till there's laser and projectile tanks, you haven't even begun to see the qq. Also a big portion of the 'problem' with tanks is that no one wants to switch off of their assault rifle for any reason ever. I have literally seen 7 people cowering inside a building with uplinks and nanos because 'ahmuhgurd tanks' and none of them when they died would switch to even so much as a mlt forge or swarm.
Vicious Minotaur Tronhadar Free Guard Minmatar Republic 446	Posted - 2013.12.20 10:36:00 - [5] - Quote Blaster tank turrets are pretty much glorified pre-1.7 ARs at this point...
pegasis prime BIG BAD W0LVES 1454	Posted - 2013.12.20 10:37:00 - [6] - Quote I prefer to run missiles or rails on my gunlogi but most of the time when im on squad my squad leaders want blaster support simply because of its raw killing power, I have seen threads about removing large blasters altogether but I don't think this is the solution , My personal solution would be to change the blasters rate of fire to that of the old compressed blasters as they had quite a slow rate of fire and only slightly higher damage than the satterd, this would make it still viable to get enemy infantry kills while defending your self but would take much more skill to get those kills because of the decreased rate of fire. I also think the slower rate of fire would make the turret feel more tank , i.e. slow firing but powerful cannon . Its gone from suck .....to blow level 1 forum warrior
Lorhak Gannarsein Science For Death 801	Posted - 2013.12.20 10:37:00 - [7] - Quote Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: Ssh, you'll upset the tankers. I have fitting opt 5 in railguns (which is another way of saying I'm reasonably SP heavy into the things - I probably should have stopped at four, but that's another matter entirely). I don't even have proto blasters, cos it's boring. Too damn easy to faceroll infantry; railing them, though, at CQC, is hilariously rewarding. >Cosgar: You know, tanks are actually paper thin once their modules are in cooldown.
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI 7538	Posted - 2013.12.20 10:47:00 - [8] - Quote +1 Me at Cat_Merc were discussing the balance and logic to having a large turret designed specifically to kill infantry. He convinced me that it isn't good design, there is a reason most games don't have tanks with such high rate of fire main turrets designed to kill infantry. He concluded he'd like to see large blaster be more like plasma cannons, but that's likely too extreme to ever be implemented, but at the very least, something needs to be done about large blasters. MLT large blasters being so good leads to tanks not having to make fitting sacrifices to fit a good large blaster. Only higher tier large blasters should be that good; this was tanks must have substantial fitting sacrifices (like overall less HP and defenses) to be that good at killing infantry. Gû¦Gû+Supreme emperor god-kingpÇÉKAGEH¦PSHIpÇæ// Lord of the threads // Forum alt Gû¦Gû+
Korvin Lomont United Pwnage Service RISE of LEGION 383	Posted - 2013.12.20 10:59:00 - [9] - Quote MINA Longstrike wrote: Wait till there's laser and projectile tanks, you haven't even begun to see the qq. Also a big portion of the 'problem' with tanks is that no one wants to switch off of their assault rifle for any reason ever. I have literally seen 7 people cowering inside a building with uplinks and nanos because 'ahmuhgurd tanks' and none of them when they died would switch to even so much as a mlt forge or swarm. The problem is why should we? When a full clip of Proto swarms with two complex damage mods is not able to bring down a soma? Why should I sacrifice 90% of my Anti Infantry power just to tickle tanks with proto AV?? There is no benefit in doing this the only halfway viable Infantry based counters to tanks are forges (that require a heavy to carry them) or RE's (coupled with AV/Flux nades) where you don't loose your AI power. The PLC is a joke and swarms not woth the risk...
HowDidThatTaste Ancient Exiles. Renegade Alliance 4228	Posted - 2013.12.20 11:11:00 - [10] - Quote Blasters should suffer the HMG curse extremely effective up close and crap at range.

Operative 1171 Aajli Bragian Order Amarr Empire 906	Posted - 2013.12.20 11:18:00 - [11] - Quote I suggested this some time ago. Even before 1.7 only the blaster madrugars were the real problem against infantry. I don't understand the logic of having a gigantic machine gun. I want a cannon. The blaster could still be the most useful against infantry while being a little more problematic but be better against tanks. Solution: nerf the RoF and increase the damage. You still get higher RoF than other turrets but you have to track a bit more to get a shot on infantry. They could jump between the rounds better. Do your part. Join the revolution. Sabotage FW. Help this game burn! BURN DUST 2014
The-Errorist Closed For Business For All Mankind 405	Posted - 2013.12.20 11:21:00 - [12] - Quote Something does need to be done about them. They feel less like ion cannons and more like ion machine-guns.
Cat Merc Ahrendee Mercenaries EoN. 4825	Posted - 2013.12.20 12:03:00 - [13] - Quote I was thinking about it, and what if blasters required so much CPU/PG, that the user would be forced to have no tank? So infantry with AV could easily destroy them unless the tank kills them first. Shield regeneration bonus for Gallente Assault is about as useful as Sharpshooter for Nova Knives. Tuna > Tacos
Kasote Denzara A Vulture 1427	Posted - 2013.12.20 12:12:00 - [14] - Quote Bah. It's difficult to get away from blasters, but blasters find it difficult to get away from R/Es cleverly planted. "Go ahead and dual tank. My Commando dual ganks." -Kasote Denzara You can find me in Gallente's FW. I smell of freedom.
Alan-Ibn-Xuan Al-Alasabe Chatelain Rapid Response Gallente Federation 452	Posted - 2013.12.20 12:34:00 - [15] - Quote In EVE large ships struggle to kill smaller ships because the large turrets are too slow to track the small, fast target. Meanwhile the small ship often can't kill the larger one because the larger one can repair faster than the smaller can do damage. Sound familiar? Vehicles should function in a somewhat analogous way. Turrets should have a hard time tracking small targets, and all weapons should get a resolution property so that they deal less damage to targets with a smaller signature radius than their scan resolution. This would allow HAVs to serve a more tank like role, providing infantry support and the like. It would also mean that AV balanced to take out HAVs wouldn't necessarily be able to completely ruin lighter vehicles. I've never been a fan of treating vehicles like double extra heavy dropsuits. They should have a completely different tactical role than dropsuits, and making it more difficult for either to kill the other would help with that.
Rasatsu Much Crying Old Experts 962	Posted - 2013.12.20 12:50:00 - [16] - Quote So are you saying that blasters are OP against tanks? Derp A Herp
GET ATMESON Dem Durrty Boyz Renegade Alliance 199	Posted - 2013.12.20 13:08:00 - [17] - Quote MINA Longstrike wrote: Wait till there's laser and projectile tanks, you haven't even begun to see the qq. Also a big portion of the 'problem' with tanks is that no one wants to switch off of their assault rifle for any reason ever. I have literally seen 7 people cowering inside a building with uplinks and nanos because 'ahmuhgurd tanks' and none of them when they died would switch to even so much as a mlt forge or swarm. Whats the point. They wont hurt a tank. If it does hurt the tank It will move at scout speed away from us. You know you do it. No need to lie :) 1.7 HMG hotfix works great. Now for more Heavy suits or guns soonGäó
Tebu Gan Dem Durrty Boyz Renegade Alliance 319	Posted - 2013.12.20 13:13:00 - [18] - Quote pegasis prime wrote: I prefer to run missiles or rails on my gunlogi but most of the time when im on squad my squad leaders want blaster support simply because of its raw killing power, I have seen threads about removing large blasters altogether but I don't think this is the solution , My personal solution would be to change the blasters rate of fire to that of the old compressed blasters as they had quite a slow rate of fire and only slightly higher damage than the satterd, this would make it still viable to get enemy infantry kills while defending your self but would take much more skill to get those kills because of the decreased rate of fire. I also think the slower rate of fire would make the turret feel more tank , i.e. slow firing but powerful cannon . I like this idea. Blasters are most certainly the MAIN thing infantry has got to be complaining about. Missiles and rails are not infantry slayers. They are tank slayers. Nuff Said
NOAMIzzzzz BIG BAD W0LVES 78	Posted - 2013.12.20 13:13:00 - [19] - Quote Nelf pls OP is OP
Takahiro Kashuken Red Star. EoN. 2001	Posted - 2013.12.20 13:20:00 - [20] - Quote So a tank cannot have a turret which kills infantry effectively but yet infantry can have a weapon like the FG which can easily kill tanks/infantry effectively??? Double standards much? Frankly its not my fault if everyone is assault and im in a tank, i pick the tank for the situation and blaster has served me well and if im getting high kill counts then whos fault is it? Intelligence is OP

Korvin Lomont United Pwnage Service RISE of LEGION 384	Posted - 2013.12.20 13:23:00 - [21] - Quote Takahiro Kashuken wrote: So a tank cannot have a turret which kills infantry effectively but yet infantry can have a weapon like the FG which can easily kill tanks/infantry effectively??? Double standards much? Frankly its not my fault if everyone is assault and im in a tank, i pick the tank for the situation and blaster has served me well and if im getting high kill counts then whos fault is it? Last time I checked the rail gun is quite deadly against infantry...at least equally effectice like the forge vs infantry so whats your point?
Takahiro Kashuken Red Star. EoN. 2001	Posted - 2013.12.20 13:28:00 - [22] - Quote Korvin Lomont wrote: Takahiro Kashuken wrote: So a tank cannot have a turret which kills infantry effectively but yet infantry can have a weapon like the FG which can easily kill tanks/infantry effectively??? Double standards much? Frankly its not my fault if everyone is assault and im in a tank, i pick the tank for the situation and blaster has served me well and if im getting high kill counts then whos fault is it? Last time I checked the rail gun is quite deadly against infantry...at least equally effectice like the forge vs infantry so whats your point? True but i like using a large duvolle so why cant i use it? Also because its a main way for killing infantry it can and does sacrifice its ability to put a severe dent into tanks Intelligence is OP
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI 7544	Posted - 2013.12.20 13:30:00 - [23] - Quote Takahiro Kashuken wrote: So a tank cannot have a turret which kills infantry effectively but yet infantry can have a weapon like the FG which can easily kill tanks/infantry effectively??? Double standards much? Frankly its not my fault if everyone is assault and im in a tank, i pick the tank for the situation and blaster has served me well and if im getting high kill counts then whos fault is it? You have thousands of HP, resistances, and hardneners. You can kill infantry waaaaay faster than they can kill you, and that is IF they can kill you at all considering how fast you can escape. Infantry can only hurt you if they make significant sacrifices in their anti-infantry capabilities, which makes themselves further vulnerable. You can pretend using a blaster tank is the same kind of tradeoff and say blasters are totally ineffective against railgun and missile tanks, but I've seen blaster tanks come out on top in a tank fight (my brother is a tanker). Don't pretend its somehow equivalent. No one is saying tanks should never be able to effectively kill infantry, but ever thought there is such a thing as too effective? Gû¦Gû+Supreme emperor god-kingpÇÉKAGEH¦PSHIpÇæ// Lord of the threads // Forum alt Gû¦Gû+
Korvin Lomont United Pwnage Service RISE of LEGION 384	Posted - 2013.12.20 13:30:00 - [24] - Quote Takahiro Kashuken wrote: Korvin Lomont wrote: Takahiro Kashuken wrote: So a tank cannot have a turret which kills infantry effectively but yet infantry can have a weapon like the FG which can easily kill tanks/infantry effectively??? Double standards much? Frankly its not my fault if everyone is assault and im in a tank, i pick the tank for the situation and blaster has served me well and if im getting high kill counts then whos fault is it? Last time I checked the rail gun is quite deadly against infantry...at least equally effectice like the forge vs infantry so whats your point? True but i like using a large duvolle so why cant i use it? Also because its a main way for killing infantry it can and does sacrifice its ability to put a severe dent into tanks Blasters are in contrast to a duvolle quite effective vs tanks...when they come in range...
Arkena Wyrnspire Turalyon 514 Turalyon Alliance 6510	Posted - 2013.12.20 13:38:00 - [25] - Quote Takahiro Kashuken wrote: So a tank cannot have a turret which kills infantry effectively but yet infantry can have a weapon like the FG which can easily kill tanks/infantry effectively??? Double standards much? Frankly its not my fault if everyone is assault and im in a tank, i pick the tank for the situation and blaster has served me well and if im getting high kill counts then whos fault is it? The FG is not nearly as good at killing infantry as blaster turrets are. Level 6 Forum Warrior Lenin of the glorious armoured revolution Gallente FW - 'Turalyon'
Takahiro Kashuken Red Star. EoN. 2001	Posted - 2013.12.20 13:40:00 - [26] - Quote KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Takahiro Kashuken wrote: So a tank cannot have a turret which kills infantry effectively but yet infantry can have a weapon like the FG which can easily kill tanks/infantry effectively??? Double standards much? Frankly its not my fault if everyone is assault and im in a tank, i pick the tank for the situation and blaster has served me well and if im getting high kill counts then whos fault is it? You have thousands of HP, resistances, and hardneners. You can kill infantry waaaaay faster than they can kill you, and that is IF they can kill you at all considering how fast you can escape. Infantry can only hurt you if they make significant sacrifices in their anti-infantry capabilities, which makes themselves further vulnerable. You can pretend using a blaster tank is the same kind of tradeoff and say blasters are totally ineffective against railgun and missile tanks, but I've seen blaster tanks come out on top in a tank fight (my brother is a tanker). Don't pretend its somehow equivalent. No one is saying tanks should never be able to effectively kill infantry, but ever thought there is such a thing as too effective? Never said they are ineffective against missile tanks i have to play smarter and get the drop on them, also against a railgun tank i aint ever gonna dent it if its a redline railtank unless it comes out to play and i can get the drop on it Too effective? No not really, its main job is to kill infantry, maybe tanks too depending on your build Intelligence is OP
Cat Merc Ahrendee Mercenaries EoN. 4825	Posted - 2013.12.20 13:47:00 - [27] - Quote Blaster turrets are very effective against tanks, and I do mean very. I constantly beat rails and missiles simply by employing my increased rotation speed and freedom of movement to my advantage. I can easily set up situations where other tanks can't hit me while I blast them. Shield regeneration bonus for Gallente Assault is about as useful as Sharpshooter for Nova Knives. Tuna > Tacos
Takahiro Kashuken Red Star. EoN. 2001	Posted - 2013.12.20 13:47:00 - [28] - Quote Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: Takahiro Kashuken wrote: So a tank cannot have a turret which kills infantry effectively but yet infantry can have a weapon like the FG which can easily kill tanks/infantry effectively??? Double standards much? Frankly its not my fault if everyone is assault and im in a tank, i pick the tank for the situation and blaster has served me well and if im getting high kill counts then whos fault is it? The FG is not nearly as good at killing infantry as blaster turrets are. Got plenty of high kill counts with both weapons But still ignoring the point you get the FG to kills lots of tanks but i cant have a turret which can kill lots of infantry Intelligence is OP
Cat Merc Ahrendee Mercenaries EoN. 4825	Posted - 2013.12.20 13:48:00 - [29] - Quote Takahiro Kashuken wrote: Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: Takahiro Kashuken wrote: So a tank cannot have a turret which kills infantry effectively but yet infantry can have a weapon like the FG which can easily kill tanks/infantry effectively??? Double standards much? Frankly its not my fault if everyone is assault and im in a tank, i pick the tank for the situation and blaster has served me well and if im getting high kill counts then whos fault is it? The FG is not nearly as good at killing infantry as blaster turrets are. Got plenty of high kill counts with both weapons But still ignoring the point you get the FG to kills lots of tanks but i cant have a turret which can kill lots of infantry Blaster vs Tank > FG vs Tank Shield regeneration bonus for Gallente Assault is about as useful as Sharpshooter for Nova Knives. Tuna > Tacos
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI 7546	Posted - 2013.12.20 13:50:00 - [30] - Quote Takahiro Kashuken wrote: Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: Takahiro Kashuken wrote: So a tank cannot have a turret which kills infantry effectively but yet infantry can have a weapon like the FG which can easily kill tanks/infantry effectively??? Double standards much? Frankly its not my fault if everyone is assault and im in a tank, i pick the tank for the situation and blaster has served me well and if im getting high kill counts then whos fault is it? The FG is not nearly as good at killing infantry as blaster turrets are. Got plenty of high kill counts with both weapons But still ignoring the point you get the FG to kills lots of tanks but i cant have a turret which can kill lots of infantry FG's tank-killing power is waaaaaaaaay exceeded by the large blaster's infantry-killing power. False equivalency. EDIT: Cat Merc's post above mine says it best. Gû¦Gû+Supreme emperor god-kingpÇÉKAGEH¦PSHIpÇæ// Lord of the threads // Forum alt Gû¦Gû+



Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page