So, I might have fallen out of the loop here at some point but are Large Blasters meant to be anti infantry or anti vehicle? I'm just wondering because the Large Railgun outperforms the Large Blaster at both roles. Large Railgun takes one shot to kill most infantry, works at close to far range and is more effective at taking out other vehicles at close to far range as well.

The only thing in favor of the Large Blaster is that it doesn't require aiming thanks to the dispersion. You just point it generally in the right direction and hold the trigger down and wait for kills to happen. If you aim it directly at your enemies then it's still no more effective at it's job.

So the "problem" with Large Railgun is that it requires aiming, but if you got aim, there's no reason to go for the Blaster. It's accuracy is poor, range is poor and damage is poor.

Not asking for any changes to be made here, I just want to know what it's meant for because currently there is very little incentive to use it for anything if you know how to aim. I only ever use it when I want to relax and don't want to aim, instead just point it roughly at my enemies and hope that it hits something enough times to kill it.

Edit: Just realized this might be in the wrong section. Oh well, damage is already done.

Blaster kills infantry far better than the railgun. You can claim to have aim, but you certainly aren't going to go around with a large railgun and kill infantry that doesn't stand still for you. Sure you get a lucky shot now and again, and some are more consistent, but the fact still remains a blaster will outperform a rail in most all situations. When it comes to killing infantry that is.

Added note, I use blasters to deal with shield tanks, works GREAT. Missiles for maddies, and a railgun for versatility simply due to nature of it.

But more often then not, a railgun gunnlogi isn't going to beat my blaster gunnlogi in a straight up fight.

AV