DUST Search - Vehicles are useless and irrelevent.

Pocket Rocket Girl wrote:

Quote:

="Sir Dukey"Thanks for the novel. Hope it get's published. Fixed some mistakes. Anyway, just to be clear, no where does it say the blaster turret is for AV. The turret was originally meant for AI. Go ahead and look up chromosome Blaster turret video. The videos are a great example of how good the turret used to be.

Tanks right now are Rock vs. Rock vs. Rock.
Some rock is hard and some rock is fragile. Why use the fragile rock when you can use the harder rock?

One acutely notes that correcting grammar is not the same as refuting an argument. in fact your expressing two logical fallacies in order to avoid actually refuting what I said. First, your attempting to shift the argument away from the issues by pointing out something completely unrelated to the topic at hand. In argument this action is the same as a man caught stealing pointing his finger and saying "look a fire over there!" and then using the opportunity to run away. Second, instead of actually discussing the pertinent points you instead attack the character of my language thereby creating an argument that fundamentally is a logic fallacy. That fallacy is that if someone expresses an idea in a way you do not like then that idea has no merit, we both know here and now that such an argument is fluff and bullshit.

There is another felacious Oops

argument expressed above. You argue that the blaster was intended to be anti infantry weapon and provide a video as evidence. The argument you are expressing therefore is that "the blaster was effective against infantry, therefore it was intended to be used against infantry." This itself is an illogical argument, for many things are useful in applications other than their designed purpose, but that does not make them an intended tool for that application. A peen hammer will hammer nails well, but that does not make the peen hammer a carpenters hammer.

Your tanks are modifiable. They have weapons such as machineguns that are intended to defend the armor against infantry. You have a choice in setting up your tank in this game. You can design a tank destroyer, or a more flexible main battle tank that is designed to operate against infantry targets as well as armor but flexibility has its costs. Its much like those who have anti vehicle loadouts without any means of defending against infantry.

Would you please find a chromosome blaster video, i can not seem to find one.


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Dovallis Martan JenusKoll Osmon Surveillance Caldari State 1054	Posted - 2014.12.30 00:09:00 - [1] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Byozuma Kegawa wrote: And then you get a squad that just wants to have fun, call in LAVs and race around flicking birds at your 'srsbsns' gameplay. Do that when you don't see my name, because if I see an enemy vehicle, it's going to burn. Yeah because AV is nothing more than a "Baby Feeder" mode. Easiest role to "master". Tanks were insanely easy to kill. Then they got health reductions. Tanks were absolutely stupidly easy to kill. Then they got range reductions. Tanks were laughable paper wads on the field. Then they got accuracy reductions. Now tanks are so simple to kill, if you can't kill then with AV, you'd better go slit your wrists, because somehow you can't use a lock-on system. It's like watching a 2 year old gloat that they can beat a game on an iPhone that only requires tapping in one spot and nothing else. It's that stupidly easy to do. Yet... you act like this is some kind of accomplishment? As if you are some kind of threat yourself, and not the game mechanics? I gave my controller to a 5 year old cousin showed her how to lock on with the Swarm Launcher, and she blew up about 4 tanks without knowing what the hell she was doing. You feel proud doing what any child can do? Fine. But remember, it's not you. All that power is coming from your purchases, and you have no claim to any of it's effective potential. No planning needed. No routes realized. You don't even need escape ROUTES, just a wall to shuffle behind. I say this from an AV perspective, because all I ever did with tanks, was run after other tanks. I have now just stopped paying attention to any tanks on the field (unless it's going after a supply depot). They don't do anything and I can just run around them. http://youtu.be/dtXupQg77SU Dust to Dust Remember the dream you had before the day you were born.
Dovallis Martan JenusKoll Osmon Surveillance Caldari State 1054	Posted - 2014.12.30 00:30:00 - [2] - Quote DDx77 wrote: I think pocket rocket girl hit the nail on the head......... He's never driven a tank into combat. o.o; There are literally places where tanks can be running at full speed toward cover while at max health, and be killed by swarms before they even get there. If "Girl" was right, such a scenario would be impossible, and the ability to carefully plot a path would actually exist. http://youtu.be/dtXupQg77SU Dust to Dust Remember the dream you had before the day you were born.
Dovallis Martan JenusKoll Osmon Surveillance Caldari State 1055	Posted - 2014.12.31 22:40:00 - [3] - Quote Pocket Rocket Girl wrote: Quote: ="Sir Dukey"Thanks for the novel. Hope it get's published. Fixed some mistakes. Anyway, just to be clear, no where does it say the blaster turret is for AV. The turret was originally meant for AI. Go ahead and look up chromosome Blaster turret video. The videos are a great example of how good the turret used to be. Tanks right now are Rock vs. Rock vs. Rock. Some rock is hard and some rock is fragile. Why use the fragile rock when you can use the harder rock? One acutely notes that correcting grammar is not the same as refuting an argument. in fact your expressing two logical fallacies in order to avoid actually refuting what I said. First, your attempting to shift the argument away from the issues by pointing out something completely unrelated to the topic at hand. In argument this action is the same as a man caught stealing pointing his finger and saying "look a fire over there!" and then using the opportunity to run away. Second, instead of actually discussing the pertinent points you instead attack the character of my language thereby creating an argument that fundamentally is a logic fallacy. That fallacy is that if someone expresses an idea in a way you do not like then that idea has no merit, we both know here and now that such an argument is fluff and bullshit. There is another felacious argument expressed above. You argue that the blaster was intended to be anti infantry weapon and provide a video as evidence. The argument you are expressing therefore is that "the blaster was effective against infantry, therefore it was intended to be used against infantry." This itself is an illogical argument, for many things are useful in applications other than their designed purpose, but that does not make them an intended tool for that application. A peen hammer will hammer nails well, but that does not make the peen hammer a carpenters hammer. Your tanks are modifiable. They have weapons such as machineguns that are intended to defend the armor against infantry. You have a choice in setting up your tank in this game. You can design a tank destroyer, or a more flexible main battle tank that is designed to operate against infantry targets as well as armor but flexibility has its costs. Its much like those who have anti vehicle loadouts without any means of defending against infantry. Would you please find a chromosome blaster video, i can not seem to find one. I find it interesting that you believe Machine Guns are not supposed to be used against infantry. Please tell me what the purpose of the HMG or SMG is then. Yes, the "Blaster" is a large machine gun. Weapon categories were originally Blaster -- infantry specialization Rail -- Vehicle specialization Missile -- a bit of both. Now tanks have no real infantry anything. Mount a small blaster or small rail? That's like saying "Use a Militia grade weapon, because the larger Prototype weapons shouldn't be allowed to damage infantry". As of now the weapon alignments are: Blaster -- Nothing, don't try to run this without at least one swarm assistant (who will do more damage than you BTW) Rail -- acceptable against tanks, not very specialized. High wobble in reticule makes it near impossible to hit infantry. Missile -- Blows tanks to shreds without much effort. Can mutilate infantry that gets too close, within 30 meters. In other words, there are no anti-infantry tank builds. your last paragraph is basically a self-created delusion, of unreasonable proportions. ----Last I checked, AV loadouts were mostly applied to Commandos. That means Swarm in one hand, Combat Rifle in the other. I mean seriously... do you even play the game? At ALL? Can you show us a video of this magical "flexibility" in action? I would love to see you try to survive a combat region for about 5 minutes without switching or abandoning your tank. If you cannot stay INSIDE the combat zone with a defense oriented tank, then your entire argument is proven false. (in other words, you don't just use a bit of cover on the field, but retreat a good distance down the field possibly even into your own base. Everyone who plays a tank knows you can only survive if you play at the edge of the combat zone, and retreat as fast as you can whenever there is incoming AV fire. If you don't do these two things you will die. There is NO flexibility in the general gameplay of tanks. If you stop to fire back, you are DEAD. No questions asked. Returning fire is NOT an option. Yet people claim infantry to be at a disadvantage? Where? Infantry can force tanks to never be allowed visual range of them by using the environment while firing AV volleys without care. Here's a clip that illustrates a typical tank deployment. Notice how they are supported by the ground troops, but also notice how easily the tanks are simply demolished. http://youtu.be/5tCJzBM_llw?t=6m49s I haven't been able to find any tank gameplay videos from the last few months, just videos of tanks blowing up. If they were even remotely as versatile as you say, I should have found a good handful. http://youtu.be/dtXupQg77SU Dust to Dust Remember the dream you had before the day you were born.
Dovallis Martan JenusKoll Osmon Surveillance Caldari State 1056	Posted - 2015.01.03 05:55:00 - [4] - Quote Atiim wrote: Interesting, give me an example. There are a few more locations than these, but I'm just giving the most obvious. Fracture Road is the biggest contender with a pair of death points. An inexperienced Proto user can down a tank before they have time to choose an escape route.(however shield oriented tanks may escape with a sliver, but not armor types) The road that runs through F4 and the back route through J11 are both death routes if a Proto swarmer is on the hill near those locations. If the Swarmer has an LAV, just forget about escaping, cause you can't get enough distance to heal before they zip up and roast you. I've encountered solo Commandos camping these points before ingame, almost completely uncontested. Due to the kind of roads they are, there is no possibility of firing back, and the only way to escape is if the Swarm user announces itself prematurely. http://youtu.be/dtXupQg77SU Dust to Dust Remember the dream you had before the day you were born.
Dovallis Martan JenusKoll Osmon Surveillance Caldari State 1056	Posted - 2015.01.04 07:51:00 - [5] - Quote taxi bastard wrote: if they are so useless and irrelevant, why do they dominate mates so often. to be fair they can be killed but they are a huge force multiplier in the form of tanks and it can't be denied that even militia DS can turn a game. Why do crappy games sell? Because they have fancy graphics, nothing else. Visual acknowledgement. Same thing goes for tanks. You blame them only because they are the most flashy thing on the field, not the best. Same thing for a crow when they decide. Give them a choice between something dark, but very edible, and an inedible, but very shiny object, and the crow will check the shiny object first. http://youtu.be/dtXupQg77SU Dust to Dust Remember the dream you had before the day you were born.