DUST Search - My plee

Alam Storm wrote:

Rowdy Railgunner wrote:

Alam Storm wrote:

Rowdy Railgunner wrote:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YSIuUQsujXc&feature=c4-overview&list=UUZLjxwaV6kg-2-iPgLTVVnQ

Unnerf the TAC magazine.

lmao i sorppose thats one way to whine about it or atleast pretend to whine about it :P

No pretend. I want the magazine increased to the size it was before the great TAC nerf. I feel the range is fine. Just give us TAC users back our magazine that we had before. Now that all ARs are ingame, TAC is no longer the OP weapon of the day and I am not asking for a recoil reduction or a damage increase. I am just asking CCP to return the small amount of bullets that were stolen from us in the TAC nerf. Reload is death and if you do the math, the TAC needs 24+ rounds in the magazine to be competitive.

increasing the bullets in a mag increases damage if you are saying for a few extra bullets you effectively asking for more damage CCP wont do this becuase to many people will again complain TAC AR are OP

im sorry but you look at all the weapons in this game most use AR so its targeted most to being OP then when thats nerved to **** people will compain about the rail rifle combat rifle and scrambler rifle basicly all rifles apart from the one they are using

and i was talking about the youtube link

Pages: [1] :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Rowdy Railgunner Turalyon 514 Turalyon Alliance 321	Posted - 2013.12.28 11:56:00 - [1] - Quote http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YSIuUQsujXc&feature=c4-overview&list=UUZLjxwaV6kg-2-iPgLTVVnQ Unnerf the TAC magazine.
Alam Storm Third Rock From The Sun INTERGALACTIC WARPIGS 45	Posted - 2013.12.28 12:26:00 - [2] - Quote Rowdy Railgunner wrote: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YSIuUQsujXc&feature=c4-overview&list=UUZLjxwaV6kg-2-iPgLTVVnQ Unnerf the TAC magazine. lmao i sorppose thats one way to whine about it or atleast pretend to whine about it :P
Rowdy Railgunner Turalyon 514 Turalyon Alliance 323	Posted - 2013.12.28 12:33:00 - [3] - Quote Alam Storm wrote: Rowdy Railgunner wrote: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YSIuUQsujXc&feature=c4-overview&list=UUZLjxwaV6kg-2-iPgLTVVnQ Unnerf the TAC magazine. lmao i sorppose thats one way to whine about it or atleast pretend to whine about it :P No pretend. I want the magazine increased to the size it was before the great TAC nerf. I feel the range is fine. Just give us TAC users back our magazine that we had before. Now that all ARs are ingame, TAC is no longer the OP weapon of the day and I am not asking for a recoil reduction or a damage increase. I am just asking CCP to return the small amount of bullets that were stolen from us in the TAC nerf. Reload is death and if you do the math, the TAC needs 24+ rounds in the magazine to be competitive.
Alam Storm Third Rock From The Sun INTERGALACTIC WARPIGS 46	Posted - 2013.12.28 12:54:00 - [4] - Quote Rowdy Railgunner wrote: Alam Storm wrote: Rowdy Railgunner wrote: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YSIuUQsujXc&feature=c4-overview&list=UUZLjxwaV6kg-2-iPgLTVVnQ Unnerf the TAC magazine. lmao i sorppose thats one way to whine about it or atleast pretend to whine about it :P No pretend. I want the magazine increased to the size it was before the great TAC nerf. I feel the range is fine. Just give us TAC users back our magazine that we had before. Now that all ARs are ingame, TAC is no longer the OP weapon of the day and I am not asking for a recoil reduction or a damage increase. I am just asking CCP to return the small amount of bullets that were stolen from us in the TAC nerf. Reload is death and if you do the math, the TAC needs 24+ rounds in the magazine to be competitive. increasing the bullets in a mag increases damage if you are saying for a few extra bullets you effectively asking for more damage CCP wont do this becuase to many people will again complain TAC AR are OP im sorry but you look at all the weapons in this game most use AR so its targeted most to being OP then when thats nerved to **** people will compain about the rail rifle combat rifle and scrambler rifle basicly all rifles apart from the one they are using and i was talking about the youtube link
Arkena Wyrnspire Fatal Absolution 7192	Posted - 2013.12.28 17:40:00 - [5] - Quote Alam Storm wrote: Rowdy Railgunner wrote: Alam Storm wrote: Rowdy Railgunner wrote: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YSIuUQsujXc&feature=c4-overview&list=UUZLjxwaV6kg-2-iPgLTVVnQ Unnerf the TAC magazine. lmao i sorppose thats one way to whine about it or atleast pretend to whine about it :P No pretend. I want the magazine increased to the size it was before the great TAC nerf. I feel the range is fine. Just give us TAC users back our magazine that we had before. Now that all ARs are ingame, TAC is no longer the OP weapon of the day and I am not asking for a recoil reduction or a damage increase. I am just asking CCP to return the small amount of bullets that were stolen from us in the TAC nerf. Reload is death and if you do the math, the TAC needs 24+ rounds in the magazine to be competitive. increasing the bullets in a mag increases damage if you are saying for a few extra bullets you effectively asking for more damage CCP wont do this becuase to many people will again complain TAC AR are OP im sorry but you look at all the weapons in this game most use AR so its targeted most to being OP then when thats nerved to **** people will compain about the rail rifle combat rifle and scrambler rifle basicly all rifles apart from the one they are using and i was talking about the youtube link With the new weapons on field the TAR is simply far outperformed. I don't believe a magazine increase would make the weapon OP. The previous issue was much more with the rate of fire and the accuracy with which it could apply said fire, and although a larger clip exacerbated the issue it was not a real cause. Level 6 Forum Warrior Lenin of the glorious armoured revolution Gallente FW - 'Turalyon'
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI 7650	Posted - 2013.12.28 17:51:00 - [6] - Quote +1 I support this, it needs a bigger magazine, same with the breach AR. Also the OP has a cat, can't argue with that. Gû¦Gû+Supreme emperor god-kingpÇÉKAGEH¦PSHIpÇæ// Lord of the threads // Forum alt Gû¦Gû+
Dustbunny Durrr ReD or DeaD 23	Posted - 2013.12.28 19:33:00 - [7] - Quote Rowdy Railgunner wrote: Alam Storm wrote: Rowdy Railgunner wrote: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YSIuUQsujXc&feature=c4-overview&list=UUZLjxwaV6kg-2-iPgLTVVnQ Unnerf the TAC magazine. lmao i sorppose thats one way to whine about it or atleast pretend to whine about it :P No pretend. I want the magazine increased to the size it was before the great TAC nerf. I feel the range is fine. Just give us TAC users back our magazine that we had before. Now that all ARs are ingame, TAC is no longer the OP weapon of the day and I am not asking for a recoil reduction or a damage increase. I am just asking CCP to return the small amount of bullets that were stolen from us in the TAC nerf. Reload is death and if you do the math, the TAC needs 24+ rounds in the magazine to be competitive. With the new rifles, I do think having a larger TAC magazine would have it see more use. I honestly don't know the last time someone killed me a with a tac, and when you can say that about any weapon, you know it needs love.
Draco Cerberus BurgezzE.T.F Public Disorder. 638	Posted - 2013.12.28 20:56:00 - [8] - Quote I agree with this request as well. I recently attempted to make use of a small stockpile of the Duvolle TAC ARs and was stymied by the low ROF, Low mag size and shorter range than I am currently used to. An increase in the magazine size may offset some of the less than good stats (compared to the new weapons) that have been introduced to combat QQ. I would ask rather than just the mag size though that the weapon be returned to it's pre nerf stats, as the ROF no longer seems to be an issue for everyone (CRs have a higher ROF and RRs do as well) using the new rifles. LogiGod earns his pips
The-Errorist Closed For Business For All Mankind 429	Posted - 2013.12.29 07:40:00 - [9] - Quote I agree with that guy not just because he has a cat. Though having a cat does drive his point a lot further than it would without one.


Pages: [1] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page