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

KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote:

Soldiersaint wrote:

Our Deepest Regret wrote:

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.

It is entirely too effective.

Its a blaster turret. Its supposed to be extremely powerful against infantry. Learn the lore before you talk trash. The blaster turret is an anti infantry turret. Did you even check before you posted this?

1) No one is denying that its meant to be anti-infantry, but there is a difference between being effective against infantry and just being plain insanely overpowered. Your logic is as ridiculous as justifying a hypothetical AV weapon that 1-hit-kills every single vehicle by saying "its supposed to be extremely powerful against vehicles".
2) Blasters and their lore originate from EVE Online, a game without any infantry; just spaceships. To say lore necessitates blasters be anti-infantry false. The lore of blasters is that they're particles contained in an electromagnetic field, and fired with magnetic propulsion.
3) Balance is far more important than lore. Only an idiot would put lore before enjoyable gameplay.

No one is trying to say blasters should not be effective against infantry, but right now they're too effective. Hitscan (no bullet travel time, hits as soon as you fire), high rate of fire, huge magazine, high damage. I'm really wondering if you're a troll or something.


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Text Grant Death Firm. Canis Eliminatus Operatives 286	Posted - 2013.12.30 05:34:00 - [1] - Quote This thread actually makes sense. I think the blaster could be much harder to fit with damage drop off much sooner. I don't think the ROF or damage would need to be messed with then. But yes most of the tanks that bother me are blaster tanks. So honestly now that I think of it, tanks are not that OP... I have only been killed by rails when I go AV, and I have only been killed by missiles when I AV in tanks.
Text Grant Death Firm. Canis Eliminatus Operatives 286	Posted - 2013.12.30 05:38:00 - [2] - Quote Oh and I'm following this thread
Text Grant Death Firm. Canis Eliminatus Operatives 286	Posted - 2013.12.31 01:40:00 - [3] - Quote I have proto swarms with lvl 3 proficiency and I find it much easier to kill tanks with my RE's
Text Grant Death Firm. Canis Eliminatus Operatives 289	Posted - 2014.01.05 03:22:00 - [4] - Quote KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Soldiersaint wrote: Our Deepest Regret wrote: 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. It is entirely too effective. Its a blaster turret. Its supposed to be extremely powerful against infantry. Learn the lore before you talk trash. The blaster turret is an anti infantry turret. Did you even check before you posted this? 1) No one is denying that its meant to be anti-infantry, but there is a difference between being effective against infantry and just being plain insanely overpowered. Your logic is as ridiculous as justifying a hypothetical AV weapon that 1-hit-kills every single vehicle by saying "its supposed to be extremely powerful against vehicles". 2) Blasters and their lore originate from EVE Online, a game without any infantry; just spaceships. To say lore necessitates blasters be anti-infantry false. The lore of blasters is that they're particles contained in an electromagnetic field, and fired with magnetic propulsion. 3) Balance is far more important than lore. Only an idiot would put lore before enjoyable gameplay. No one is trying to say blasters should not be effective against infantry, but right now they're too effective. Hitscan (no bullet travel time, hits as soon as you fire), high rate of fire, huge magazine, high damage. I'm really wondering if you're a troll or something. You make too much sense.
Text Grant Death Firm. Canis Eliminatus Operatives 294	Posted - 2014.01.16 03:52:00 - [5] - Quote The-Errorist wrote: One solution to this problem would be to make large turrets 40% less effective against infantry. This kinda makes sense because small turrets have reduced efficacy against vehicles and installations (go get an LAV and test this to see this fact), but have 100% efficacy against infantry (not counting shield/armor damage profiles). When medium sized turrets come in, they could be 20% less effective against infantry, vehicles, and installations. With that said, it would all be something like this: Small turrets: 100% against infantry/ 60% against vehicles Medium turrets: 80% against infantry/ 80% against vehicles Large turrets: 60% against infantry/ 100% against vehicles This way, it wouldn't nerf their effectiveness against vehicles and still have the best rate of fire and turning speed to kill infantry better than other turrets. We still die in less than one second. How about 70%? About 30 damage per round then. With high rate of fire and long range? Also immune to infantry fire? Sounds perfect to me.