|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Toby Flenderson
research lab
216
   |
Posted - 2014.01.27 04:28:00 -
[1] - Quote
The Attorney General wrote:Atiim wrote:The Attorney General wrote:Tanks can be taken down by a single AV person.
This thread is just silly. LAVs can also be taken out by HMGs, Mass Drivers, Flaylock Pistols and Combat Rifles. Confirmed: Anti Infantry weapons are far too versatile.
How is a weapon with literally one function (SL/AV nades) versatile? If you referring to FG/PLC then I suggest you consider how rare they are seen as infantry fighting weapons. PLC hardly ever appears in matches at all and FGs rarely come out unless tanks are running around.
Also, if you choose to ignore this first paragraph, I challenge you to find something besides the MCC tanks can't kill. There is no weapon more versatile than anything on a tank. |
Toby Flenderson
research lab
216
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 04:41:00 -
[2] - Quote
Atiim wrote:Takahiro Kashuken wrote:In my tank i have 2 drones working blow decks for the reloading of turrets and activating modules, other than that its me doing all the work
You cant prove otherwise With no DEV confirmation you can't even prove yourself correct. Even if, these alleged drones are automated and their functions are still managed by 1 player, so that argument is both incorrect and irrelevant.
Haha try this...
No. There are no drones and things are not as you claim. You cannot prove otherwise, thus you are wrong by your own logic.
Give it up, Atiim, you can't argue with someone who thinks that a magical teapot in the asteroid belt is worth believing in just because it cannot be proven to not exist. |
Toby Flenderson
research lab
218
|
Posted - 2014.01.28 02:25:00 -
[3] - Quote
Takahiro Kashuken wrote:Toby Flenderson wrote:Atiim wrote:Takahiro Kashuken wrote:In my tank i have 2 drones working blow decks for the reloading of turrets and activating modules, other than that its me doing all the work
You cant prove otherwise With no DEV confirmation you can't even prove yourself correct. Even if, these alleged drones are automated and their functions are still managed by 1 player, so that argument is both incorrect and irrelevant. Haha try this... No. There are no drones and things are not as you claim. You cannot prove otherwise, thus you are wrong by your own logic. Give it up, Atiim, you can't argue with someone who thinks that a magical teapot in the asteroid belt is worth believing in just because it cannot be proven to not exist. Lore You cant prove otherwise But this is the future where a pod pilot in EVE can use his ship with a skeleton crew, without the pod pilot it would take a full crew In DUST with his pilot suit it only takes 1, the other 2 gunners offer nothing to the working of the tank, they dont increase its HP or its resistance or its speed etc
Lore is the reason why some people believe in fairies and leprechauns.
I feel you have completely missed my point of calling you out on using an argument from ignorance. The burden of proof is not on me as I am not the one claiming something is true. You, on the other hand, have claimed to know something as fact but can do nothing more than hope no one can prove you wrong. You're not moving forward in one direction in this way, you are only saying that you can't be pushed backwards. |
|
|
| |
|