DUST Search - Railguns need splash damage

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

Railguns need splash damage

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Rain Da Pain Dead Man's Game RUST415 3	Posted - 2015.01.10 21:19:00 - [1] - Quote Ccp have you ever tried hitting a cal scout with Proto swarms with a railgun? Impossible! At least with splash it would make it somewhat ' easy' even a 25% splash! That's only around 250 dmg! With the slow rof it would not be op at all!
Gavr1lo Pr1nc1p Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 3484	Posted - 2015.01.10 21:21:00 - [2] - Quote You're not supposed to kill infantry with a railgun... If you wanna kill infantry use a blaster. "Minja" and "Masochist" are synonyms. FA's Shotgunning T-Dome Champ I piss Remote Explosives and shit Shotgun shells.
Rain Da Pain Dead Man's Game RUST415 3	Posted - 2015.01.10 21:23:00 - [3] - Quote So if I sit on a roof and forge gun someone that's not the same thing? They are not 'meant' to kill infantry! It's not a slaying turret anyway but it would give tankers a hand against op av
Breakin Stuff Internal Error. Negative-Feedback 6288	Posted - 2015.01.10 21:34:00 - [4] - Quote Rain Da Pain wrote: So if I sit on a roof and forge gun someone that's not the same thing? They are not 'meant' to kill infantry! It's not a slaying turret anyway but it would give tankers a hand against op av if I can hit a scout with an assault forge body shot, you can figure out how to clip a scout with a rail turret EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
Toobar Zoobar The Unholy Legion Of DarkStar DARKSTAR ARMY 64	Posted - 2015.01.10 21:38:00 - [5] - Quote Gavr1lo Pr1nc1p wrote: You're not supposed to kill infantry with a railgun... If you wanna kill infantry use a blaster. Every large gun should be somewhat effective at killing infantry how else are we to defend ourselves? The ideal situation should be it you want to focus on killing infantry use a blaster. If you want to focus on killing vehicles use a railgun. However we should still be able to scare off or kill ( albeit ineffectively ) strafing infantry. How is it fair that some guy can run at us out in the open and push us back. It almost comical in a tragic way. Here I am in a 500,000isk monster and a anti-armour can keep firing at me with his skilless swarm launcher and eventually i'll have to retreat. It's so frustrating. Dust 514. A game about shooting people with super deadly sci-fi guns... and dancing.
Toobar Zoobar The Unholy Legion Of DarkStar DARKSTAR ARMY 64	Posted - 2015.01.10 21:43:00 - [6] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Rain Da Pain wrote: So if I sit on a roof and forge gun someone that's not the same thing? They are not 'meant' to kill infantry! It's not a slaying turret anyway but it would give tankers a hand against op av if I can hit a scout with an assault forge body shot, you can figure out how to clip a scout with a rail turret It's much easier to kill infantry that's not aware of you, they're usually running in a straight line. Easy to land a shot on them. However it they are aware there's a guy shooting at them with a railgun then it's easy for them to avoid getting shot. Just start running and throw some zig-zags in there and it just becomes luck if they get hit or not. Dust 514. A game about shooting people with super deadly sci-fi guns... and dancing.
Rain Da Pain Dead Man's Game RUST415 3	Posted - 2015.01.10 22:33:00 - [7] - Quote I know you can say its not for infantry but if you had to drive around in a 400k hunk of metal you would at least want to be able to hit all infantry
Vesta Opalus T.H.I.R.D R.O.C.K General Tso's Alliance 298	Posted - 2015.01.10 22:39:00 - [8] - Quote Rain Da Pain wrote: So if I sit on a roof and forge gun someone that's not the same thing? They are not 'meant' to kill infantry! It's not a slaying turret anyway but it would give tankers a hand against op av Its much easier to hit infantry with the railgun than it is with the forge gun. Do you really want to go there?
Bahirae Serugiusu Vendetta Reactionary Force 460	Posted - 2015.01.10 22:39:00 - [9] - Quote If it kills scouts it will never be implemented and will probably be nerfed. Like the Rail Rifle The State will always survive.
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 2712	Posted - 2015.01.11 00:37:00 - [10] - Quote Gavr1lo Pr1nc1p wrote: You're not supposed to kill infantry with a railgun... If you wanna kill infantry use a blaster. Blaster is terrible. Do you even tank? And with all my experience, do you really mean to say that I shouldn't be allowed to get a body shot on infantry? I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim

Gavr1lo Pr1nc1p Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 3486	Posted - 2015.01.11 00:56:00 - [11] - Quote Toobar Zoobar wrote: Gavr1lo Pr1nc1p wrote: You're not supposed to kill infantry with a railgun... If you wanna kill infantry use a blaster. Every large gun should be somewhat effective at killing infantry how else are we to defend ourselves? The ideal situation should be it you want to focus on killing infantry use a blaster. If you want to focus on killing vehicles use a railgun. However we should still be able to scare off or kill ( albeit ineffectively ) strafing infantry. How is it fair that some guy can run at us out in the open and push us back. It almost comical in a tragic way. Here I am in a 500,000isk monster and a anti-armour can keep firing at me with his skilless swarm launcher and eventually i'll have to retreat. It's so frustrating. Use a small turret and teamwork...duh. Its not that hard. You either get good and hit the infantry, or fit a small turret and have a friend help you, or switch to it if the infantry gets in close. You tanker scrubs amaze me. "Minja" and "Masochist" are synonyms. FA's Shotgunning T-Dome Champ I piss Remote Explosives and shit Shotgun shells.
Gavr1lo Pr1nc1p Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 3486	Posted - 2015.01.11 00:58:00 - [12] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Gavr1lo Pr1nc1p wrote: You're not supposed to kill infantry with a railgun... If you wanna kill infantry use a blaster. Blaster is terrible. Do you even tank? And with all my experience, do you really mean to say that I shouldn't be allowed to get a body shot on infantry? I do actually. You've complimented my tanker alt in game actually, because I blew you up with it. Blaster is fine, its just no longer God mode brokenly OP like before. Now, it requires a small modicum of skill to use, and I still drop 15+ and 0 games with it. Maybe you do just need to get good? "Minja" and "Masochist" are synonyms. FA's Shotgunning T-Dome Champ I piss Remote Explosives and shit Shotgun shells.
Buwaro Draemon WarRavens Capital Punishment. 718	Posted - 2015.01.11 01:14:00 - [13] - Quote Fit in small blasters or missiles. You're welcome. Changes to Damage mods!
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 2712	Posted - 2015.01.11 01:48:00 - [14] - Quote Gavr1lo Pr1nc1p wrote: Toobar Zoobar wrote: Gavr1lo Pr1nc1p wrote: You're not supposed to kill infantry with a railgun... If you wanna kill infantry use a blaster. Every large gun should be somewhat effective at killing infantry how else are we to defend ourselves? The ideal situation should be it you want to focus on killing infantry use a blaster. If you want to focus on killing vehicles use a railgun. However we should still be able to scare off or kill ( albeit ineffectively ) strafing infantry. How is it fair that some guy can run at us out in the open and push us back. It almost comical in a tragic way. Here I am in a 500,000isk monster and a anti-armour can keep firing at me with his skilless swarm launcher and eventually i'll have to retreat. It's so frustrating. Use a small turret and teamwork...duh. Its not that hard. You either get good and hit the infantry, or fit a small turret and have a friend help you, or switch to it if the infantry gets in close. You tanker scrubs amaze me. Near impossible to fit a small turret without making the fit weak, yet I can fit two PRO weapons on a PRO suit. I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 2712	Posted - 2015.01.11 01:49:00 - [15] - Quote Gavr1lo Pr1nc1p wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Gavr1lo Pr1nc1p wrote: You're not supposed to kill infantry with a railgun... If you wanna kill infantry use a blaster. Blaster is terrible. Do you even tank? And with all my experience, do you really mean to say that I shouldn't be allowed to get a body shot on infantry? I do actually. You've complimented my tanker alt in game actually, because I blew you up with it. Blaster is fine, its just no longer God mode brokenly OP like before. Now, it requires a small modicum of skill to use, and I still drop 15+ and 0 games with it. Maybe you do just need to get good? lolwut You must have the wrong person. I don't compliment people. I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 2712	Posted - 2015.01.11 01:49:00 - [16] - Quote Buwaro Draemon wrote: Fit in small blasters or missiles. You're welcome. Near impossible to fit a small turret without gimping the whole tank, yet I can fit two PRO weapons on a PRO suit. Double standards as always. I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
Forever ETC Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 936	Posted - 2015.01.11 01:53:00 - [17] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Buwaro Draemon wrote: Fit in small blasters or missiles. You're welcome. Near impossible to fit a small turret without gimping the whole tank, yet I can fit two PRO weapons on a PRO suit. Double standards as always. Lol WTF, please stop. Although I'm all for Railguns and Forges getting their splash back(why did they remove it?), you are just making a fool of yourself. No one does it better than PIE Lasers4life "Jesus!" yelled the blues "No, my name is Forever"
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 2712	Posted - 2015.01.11 01:58:00 - [18] - Quote Forever ETC wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Buwaro Draemon wrote: Fit in small blasters or missiles. You're welcome. Near impossible to fit a small turret without gimping the whole tank, yet I can fit two PRO weapons on a PRO suit. Double standards as always. Lol WTF, please stop. Although I'm all for Railguns and Forges getting their splash back(why did they remove it?), you are just making a fool of yourself. Rails had splash removed because we could aim. Pilot aim had to be nerfed, thus they removed the railgun splash. I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
Sir Dukey Murphys-Law General Tso's Alliance 1500	Posted - 2015.01.11 03:25:00 - [19] - Quote Gavr1lo Pr1nc1p wrote: You're not supposed to kill infantry with a railgun... If you wanna kill infantry use a blaster. You say it as if blasters were actually good at killing infantry. Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris
Sir Dukey Murphys-Law General Tso's Alliance 1500	Posted - 2015.01.11 03:26:00 - [20] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Rain Da Pain wrote: So if I sit on a roof and forge gun someone that's not the same thing? They are not 'meant' to kill infantry! It's not a slaying turret anyway but it would give tankers a hand against op av if I can hit a scout with an assault forge body shot, you can figure out how to clip a scout with a rail turret You know, assault forgeguns have splash damage and enough to one hit kill scouts with. Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris

True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 16494	Posted - 2015.01.11 03:29:00 - [21] - Quote Gavr1lo Pr1nc1p wrote: You're not supposed to kill infantry with a railgun... If you wanna kill infantry use a blaster. You should have splash with a Railgun its the only turret in Dust 514 that actually resembles a tank main gun. *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
Sir Dukey Murphys-Law General Tso's Alliance 1500	Posted - 2015.01.11 03:29:00 - [22] - Quote Gavr1lo Pr1nc1p wrote: Toobar Zoobar wrote: Gavr1lo Pr1nc1p wrote: You're not supposed to kill infantry with a railgun... If you wanna kill infantry use a blaster. Every large gun should be somewhat effective at killing infantry how else are we to defend ourselves? The ideal situation should be it you want to focus on killing infantry use a blaster. If you want to focus on killing vehicles use a railgun. However we should still be able to scare off or kill ( albeit ineffectively ) strafing infantry. How is it fair that some guy can run at us out in the open and push us back. It almost comical in a tragic way. Here I am in a 500,000isk monster and a anti-armour can keep firing at me with his skilless swarm launcher and eventually i'll have to retreat. It's so frustrating. Use a small turret and teamwork...duh. Its not that hard. You either get good and hit the infantry, or fit a small turret and have a friend help you, or switch to it if the infantry gets in close. You tanker scrubs amaze me. No team work for thee but team work for me... This went from Infantry perspective to Tank perspective. Tanks have been sloled for a long long time. Except the release of 1.7 but CCP soon fixed it making tanks sh*tty, weak offensively and defensively Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris
Sir Dukey Murphys-Law General Tso's Alliance 1500	Posted - 2015.01.11 03:30:00 - [23] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Gavr1lo Pr1nc1p wrote: You're not supposed to kill infantry with a railgun... If you wanna kill infantry use a blaster. You should have splash with a Railgun its the only turret in Dust 514 that actually resembles a tank main gun. I want this sooo badd . I was thinking if Minmatar vehicles ever get introduced, Minmatar Large Turret would be a Huge massdriver!. But with little to no arc. Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris
Sir Dukey Murphys-Law General Tso's Alliance 1500	Posted - 2015.01.11 03:32:00 - [24] - Quote Forever ETC wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Buwaro Draemon wrote: Fit in small blasters or missiles. You're welcome. Near impossible to fit a small turret without gimping the whole tank, yet I can fit two PRO weapons on a PRO suit. Double standards as always. Lol WTF, please stop. Although I'm all for Railguns and Forges getting their splash back(why did they remove it?), you are just making a fool of yourself. He speaks the truth. Putting on small turrets kills the tank. If you put a second turret on an ADS, you literally just asked to be two shotted by a swarmer. Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris
Finn Colman Immortal Guides Learning Alliance 104	Posted - 2015.01.11 03:40:00 - [25] - Quote Forever ETC wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Buwaro Draemon wrote: Fit in small blasters or missiles. You're welcome. Near impossible to fit a small turret without gimping the whole tank, yet I can fit two PRO weapons on a PRO suit. Double standards as always. Lol WTF, please stop. Although I'm all for Railguns and Forges getting their splash back(why did they remove it?), you are just making a fool of yourself. They removed the splash so that they couldn't kill infantry as easily. PSA: Tell players to terminate in order to access mCRUs.
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 2712	Posted - 2015.01.11 03:57:00 - [26] - Quote Finn Colman wrote: Forever ETC wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Buwaro Draemon wrote: Fit in small blasters or missiles. You're welcome. Near impossible to fit a small turret without gimping the whole tank, yet I can fit two PRO weapons on a PRO suit. Double standards as always. Lol WTF, please stop. Although I'm all for Railguns and Forges getting their splash back(why did they remove it?), you are just making a fool of yourself. They removed the splash so that they couldn't kill infantry as easily. We were nerfed for being able to aim. I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 16494	Posted - 2015.01.11 04:15:00 - [27] - Quote Sir Dukey wrote: Forever ETC wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Buwaro Draemon wrote: Fit in small blasters or missiles. You're welcome. Near impossible to fit a small turret without gimping the whole tank, yet I can fit two PRO weapons on a PRO suit. Double standards as always. Lol WTF, please stop. Although I'm all for Railguns and Forges getting their splash back(why did they remove it?), you are just making a fool of yourself. He speaks the truth. Putting on small turrets kills the tank. If you put a second turret on an ADS, you literally just asked to be two shotted by a swarmer. Not on any Shield Tank since my fitting stats are off the charts. *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
Sgt Kirk Fatal Absolution 9183	Posted - 2015.01.11 04:21:00 - [28] - Quote For once Sprkr is right, damn that's weird. Blaster suck, terribly. Both small and Large but in different ways. Small blasters suck because they can't kill their only intended, specific, targets. Large Blasters suck not because they aim widely at infantry but because they honestly suck when going against Large Missiles And Large Rails. Both Blasters suffer from the same problem, being outclasses on all fronts by turrets in the same tier. By the way, small rail hit detection and registration is awful. You guys ever use a small rail? There are times when the rail decides not to fire any rounds, or seems like it doesn't, only to spontaneously overheat out of nowhere. P.S. Small turrets completely gimp a vehicle fitting, I may not be a main HAV player (I used to before they made Gallente HAVs suck ass) but I use Dropships and LAVs like crazy (which still suck compared to their Caldari counterparts) so I still know the burden of the over exaggerated small turrets resource requirements. CCP holds the Caldari's hand so this doesn't happen again.
Alena Ventrallis Intara Direct Action Caldari State 2480	Posted - 2015.01.11 06:02:00 - [29] - Quote The problem is, all large turrets are supposed to be AV according to Rattati. But then he wants small rails to also be AV. Which leaves small missiles and small blasters to be the sole AP turrets in the game. Blasters are laughably broken and almost never seen, and small missiles like to fly off course at 45 degree angles if the vehicle has any sort of movement in any given direction. The only exception I've found to the missile problem is when on the front turret of an ADS. the small railgun nerf reduced their effectiveness in a vehicle fight, which pretty much relegated them to being AP only; but small rails are hideous for misfires, overheating for no reason, and ghost rounds, where the shield pings but no damage is done. This means that vehicles can basically only engage eahc other reliably, and making space to fit AP turrets not only gimps the tank, but those AP turrets don't even work half the time. Thusthe complaints of vehicle pilots. Before we worry about reintroducing Enforcers and MArauders or tweaking fitting on Gunnlogis and MAdrugars, we need to fix the bugs plauging the vehicle turrets so they at least function properly. Listen to my muscle memory Contemplate what I've been clinging to Forty-six and two ahead of me
KEROSIINI-TERO The Rainbow Effect 1717	Posted - 2015.01.11 06:18:00 - [30] - Quote Gavr1lo Pr1nc1p wrote: You're not supposed to kill infantry with a railgun... If you wanna kill infantry use a blaster. No, large blasters were declared AV. Pro-choice! For hazardous self-activated inertial dampeners! We want to live on the edge (((of MCC)))

Rain Da Pain Dead Man's Game RUST415 3	Posted - 2015.01.11 09:15:00 - [31] - Quote ccp should release an assault railgun! Make it have 300 less damage than a normal railgun but add a percentage of splash to it e.g. 50% or 40%
Racro 01 Arifistan Simple Minded People Pty. Ltd. 490	Posted - 2015.01.11 11:00:00 - [32] - Quote Gavr1lo Pr1nc1p wrote: You're not supposed to kill infantry with a railgun... If you wanna kill infantry use a blaster. oh yeah. with what...... accuracy? that isn't on the blaster. give the blaster less or remove its dispersion and blaster tanks will be happy. *Elite Gallenten Soldier*
Racro 01 Arifistan Simple Minded People Pty. Ltd. 490	Posted - 2015.01.11 11:10:00 - [33] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Sir Dukey wrote: Forever ETC wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Buwaro Draemon wrote: Fit in small blasters or missiles. You're welcome. Near impossible to fit a small turret without gimping the whole tank, yet I can fit two PRO weapons on a PRO suit. Double standards as always. Lol WTF, please stop. Although I'm all for Railguns and Forges getting their splash back(why did they remove it?), you are just making a fool of yourself. He speaks the truth. Putting on small turrets kills the tank. If you put a second turret on an ADS, you literally just asked to be two shotted by a swarmer. Not on any Shield Tank since my fitting stats are off the charts. we all know gunnlogis are OP. fckn bullshit noobish fckn double shield hardned gunnlogis are a load of fckn bullshit to deal with. comeing from: proficiency 5 allotek plasma cannon with 3 complex lights. ion cannon madrugar fits running 1 and 2 complex blaster amps. particle cannon running double complex rail amps. proto lrge missiles running 1 and 2 coimplex missile amps. suggestion: nerf the gunnlogis fitting or buff the madrugars fitting. *Elite Gallenten Soldier*
Toobar Zoobar The Unholy Legion Of DarkStar DARKSTAR ARMY 64	Posted - 2015.01.11 14:58:00 - [34] - Quote Gavr1lo Pr1nc1p wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Gavr1lo Pr1nc1p wrote: You're not supposed to kill infantry with a railgun... If you wanna kill infantry use a blaster. Blaster is terrible. Do you even tank? And with all my experience, do you really mean to say that I shouldn't be allowed to get a body shot on infantry? I do actually. You've complimented my tanker alt in game actually, because I blew you up with it. Blaster is fine, its just no longer God mode brokenly OP like before. Now, it requires a small modicum of skill to use, and I still drop 15+ and 0 games with it. Maybe you do just need to get good? LOL "some actual skill to use" sure. The thing was with that gun was that it rewarded actual skill before ( unlike the swarm launcher ) but now it doesn't reward skill. That's all that has changed. A HAV with blaster should be able to dominate infantry. Dust 514. A game about shooting people with super deadly sci-fi guns... and dancing.
TooMany Names AlreadyTaken Going for the gold 525	Posted - 2015.01.11 15:41:00 - [35] - Quote KEROSIINI-TERO wrote: Gavr1lo Pr1nc1p wrote: You're not supposed to kill infantry with a railgun... If you wanna kill infantry use a blaster. No, large blasters were declared AV. But if there are no other tanks on the field, what's the point of being in a tank anyway? I may not have a mic, but trust me, you NEED me in your squad if you want to win. When I'm on a roll, I'm unstoppable.
Sir Dukey Murphys-Law General Tso's Alliance 1509	Posted - 2015.01.11 17:33:00 - [36] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Sir Dukey wrote: Forever ETC wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Buwaro Draemon wrote: Fit in small blasters or missiles. You're welcome. Near impossible to fit a small turret without gimping the whole tank, yet I can fit two PRO weapons on a PRO suit. Double standards as always. Lol WTF, please stop. Although I'm all for Railguns and Forges getting their splash back(why did they remove it?), you are just making a fool of yourself. He speaks the truth. Putting on small turrets kills the tank. If you put a second turret on an ADS, you literally just asked to be two shotted by a swarmer. Not on any Shield Tank since my fitting stats are off the charts. That's because you put on PG/CPU extenders. I can literally go All proto on my drop suit without even extensions. If I put on a CPU/PG extension on a dropsuit- I can literally put on everything I want and have a ton of space to work with. Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris
Rain Da Pain Dead Man's Game RUST415 4	Posted - 2015.01.11 20:02:00 - [37] - Quote Oh and cpu extenders are wont help as most people run them anyway
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 16496	Posted - 2015.01.11 20:25:00 - [38] - Quote Sir Dukey wrote: That's because you put on PG/CPU extenders. I can literally go All proto on my drop suit without even extensions. If I put on a CPU/PG extension on a dropsuit- I can literally put on everything I want and have a ton of space to work with. But that's the point I don't sacrifice anything on my tanks to fit them. In fact I gain from using them unlike any other suit or other vehicles (barring the Caldari ADS) in the game currently. I mean that one modules means I can armour tank as well. *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
Kaze Eyrou Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 1708	Posted - 2015.01.11 21:37:00 - [39] - Quote Gavr1lo Pr1nc1p wrote: You're not supposed to kill infantry with a railgun... But I do it all the time. CB Vet // Logi Bro // @KazeEyrou Kaze's Helpful Links
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 16497	Posted - 2015.01.11 21:48:00 - [40] - Quote Kaze Eyrou wrote: Gavr1lo Pr1nc1p wrote: You're not supposed to kill infantry with a railgun... But I do it all the time. Everything kills infantry mate. That's rule of thumb when you are talking about weapons that fire shells 5-10x the size of your assault rifle...... *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.

Rain Da Pain Dead Man's Game RUST415 4	Posted - 2015.01.11 22:15:00 - [41] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Kaze Eyrou wrote: Gavr1lo Pr1nc1p wrote: You're not supposed to kill infantry with a railgun... But I do it all the time. Everything kills infantry mate. That's rule of thumb when you are talking about weapons that fire shells 5-10x the size of your assault rifle...... I don't think ccp quite thought about this with taking railgun splash damage! They need to need swarms a little and then give Railguns a 25% splash damage! Then buff the madys hardeners to 40% :) tanks almost fixed
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 16497	Posted - 2015.01.11 22:33:00 - [42] - Quote Rain Da Pain wrote: True Adamance wrote: Kaze Eyrou wrote: Gavr1lo Pr1nc1p wrote: You're not supposed to kill infantry with a railgun... But I do it all the time. Everything kills infantry mate. That's rule of thumb when you are talking about weapons that fire shells 5-10x the size of your assault rifle...... I don't think ccp quite thought about this with taking railgun splash damage! They need to need swarms a little and then give Railguns a 25% splash damage! Then buff the madys hardeners to 40% :) tanks almost fixed H'mmmm fair suggestions. I prefer nerfing and buffing hardeners at the same time. Either - Both to 40% will less duration. or - Both to 30 and remains the same. AS for turrets I've been having a chat with Thaddeus Reynolds. His suggestions are that there are 3 kinds of turrets representing different kinds of ammunition in the same gun. For example 200mm Titanium Sabot - A standard kind of HEAT round with moderate AoE and fair direct damage Values. 200mm Quake Sabot - A High Explosive Armour Piercing round with the least splash and highest direct damage. 200mm Tremor Sabot - A High Explosive Fragmentation round with the highest splash and lowest direct damage. The more I think about it the less we need tank main gun tiers. Especially since in an idealised model with single shot main battle cannon the SP benefits of better tracking, faster reloads, more ammo capacity, higher and lower elevations combined with the different ammo types is more that enough of a benefit over other tanks. *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
Rain Da Pain Dead Man's Game RUST415 4	Posted - 2015.01.11 23:47:00 - [43] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Rain Da Pain wrote: True Adamance wrote: Kaze Eyrou wrote: Gavr1lo Pr1nc1p wrote: You're not supposed to kill infantry with a railgun... But I do it all the time. Everything kills infantry mate. That's rule of thumb when you are talking about weapons that fire shells 5-10x the size of your assault rifle...... I don't think ccp quite thought about this with taking railgun splash damage! They need to need swarms a little and then give Railguns a 25% splash damage! Then buff the madys hardeners to 40% :) tanks almost fixed H'mmmm fair suggestions. I prefer nerfing and buffing hardeners at the same time. Either - Both to 40% will less duration. or - Both to 30 and remains the same. AS for turrets I've been having a chat with Thaddeus Reynolds. His suggestions are that there are 3 kinds of turrets representing different kinds of ammunition in the same gun. For example 200mm Titanium HE Shell - A standard kind of HEAT round with moderate AoE and fair direct damage Values. 200mm Quake AP Sabot - A High Explosive Armour Piercing round with the least splash and highest direct damage. 200mm Tremor Cannister - A High Explosive Fragmentation round with the highest splash and lowest direct damage. The more I think about it the less we need tank main gun tiers. Especially since in an idealised model with single shot main battle cannon the SP benefits of better tracking, faster reloads, more ammo capacity, higher and lower elevations combined with the different ammo types is more that enough of a benefit over other tanks. I love the ammo idea! Ccp should add an option when you press x to edit the fitting of ammo type. Also with hardeners the madys should be 10% lower because they can tank higher but the add a 3% or something buff to large turrets with a mady
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 16501	Posted - 2015.01.12 00:00:00 - [44] - Quote Rain Da Pain wrote: I love the ammo idea! Ccp should add an option when you press x to edit the fitting of ammo type. Also with hardeners the madys should be 10% lower because they can tank higher but the add a 3% or something buff to large turrets with a mady Unfortunately the Madrugar actually rarely has more eHP than the Gunnlogi. When it comes to calculations, especially at higher levels your resistance values determined how powerful your eHP tank is rather than raw numbers. Since the Maximum stacked armour on the current Madrugar is 5885 and you have 25% resistance on that you have roughly 7356 armour and 1200 shields. Whereas on a Gunnlogi with its current statistics you can amass comparable eHP while advancing your natural resistances vs most AV forms due to lack of parity while additionally using one fitting module to stack armour for something like 7120 Shields and 2950 armour. Honestly if Gunnlogi were adjusted so that they could not stack armour as well as shields they'd almost be balanced tanks especially if hardeners were brought to parity. Moreover if Rattati adjusts tanks and adds one more On Rack Slot (primary tanking slot for tanks) then their hardeners would have to be adjusted anyway. You actually mentioned one thing I am really mystified by. Blasters, traditionally high DPS CQC weapons have the lowest DPS of all turrets while missiles, traditionally low DPS high alpha turrets have the most DPS. *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
Sir Dukey Murphys-Law General Tso's Alliance 1516	Posted - 2015.01.12 00:01:00 - [45] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Sir Dukey wrote: That's because you put on PG/CPU extenders. I can literally go All proto on my drop suit without even extensions. If I put on a CPU/PG extension on a dropsuit- I can literally put on everything I want and have a ton of space to work with. But that's the point I don't sacrifice anything on my tanks to fit them. In fact I gain from using them unlike any other suit or other vehicles (barring the Caldari ADS) in the game currently. I mean that one modules means I can armour tank as well. Well, that's a high/low problem. Shield tanking dropsuits don't sacrifice anything for putting on CPU/PG extenders. Stop hating. This is just like how Armor tankers don't sacrifice anything for dmg mods. Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 16501	Posted - 2015.01.12 00:11:00 - [46] - Quote Sir Dukey wrote: True Adamance wrote: Sir Dukey wrote: That's because you put on PG/CPU extenders. I can literally go All proto on my drop suit without even extensions. If I put on a CPU/PG extension on a dropsuit- I can literally put on everything I want and have a ton of space to work with. But that's the point I don't sacrifice anything on my tanks to fit them. In fact I gain from using them unlike any other suit or other vehicles (barring the Caldari ADS) in the game currently. I mean that one modules means I can armour tank as well. Well, that's a high/low problem. Shield tanking dropsuits don't sacrifice anything for putting on CPU/PG extenders. Stop hating. This is just like how Armor HAVers don't sacrifice anything for dmg mods. Which is very odd since damage modifying modules are Low Slot modules. However in this case I will keep hating. There are too many imbalances in Dust that are caused by the fitting inconsistencies and slot lay out, and module oddities that makes it impossible for me to ignore. Caldari HAV should not be able to Armour HAV as well as Shield HAV. Gallente HAV should be a truly viable option on on par both fitting meta wise and eHP wise with Shield HAV. HAVers should not pretend like firing automatic Main Guns like we have in Dust are appropriate armaments for our "Tanks" if you can even call them tank. *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
Rain Da Pain Dead Man's Game RUST415 4	Posted - 2015.01.12 00:29:00 - [47] - Quote Double the speed reduction on armour plates on gunlogis! But raise the shield extenders! #avgetssplashbutTankersdont
Sir Dukey Murphys-Law General Tso's Alliance 1517	Posted - 2015.01.12 01:54:00 - [48] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Sir Dukey wrote: True Adamance wrote: Sir Dukey wrote: That's because you put on PG/CPU extenders. I can literally go All proto on my drop suit without even extensions. If I put on a CPU/PG extension on a dropsuit- I can literally put on everything I want and have a ton of space to work with. But that's the point I don't sacrifice anything on my tanks to fit them. In fact I gain from using them unlike any other suit or other vehicles (barring the Caldari ADS) in the game currently. I mean that one modules means I can armour tank as well. Well, that's a high/low problem. Shield tanking dropsuits don't sacrifice anything for putting on CPU/PG extenders. Stop hating. This is just like how Armor HAVers don't sacrifice anything for dmg mods. Which is very odd since damage modifying modules are Low Slot modules. However in this case I will keep hating. There are too many imbalances in Dust that are caused by the fitting inconsistencies and slot lay out, and module oddities that makes it impossible for me to ignore. Caldari HAV should not be able to Armour HAV as well as Shield HAV. Gallente HAV should be a truly viable option on on par both fitting meta wise and eHP wise with Shield HAV. HAVers should not pretend like firing automatic Main Guns like we have in Dust are appropriate armaments for our "Tanks" if you can even call them tank. Maybe ask for armor tank CPU buffs. We all know the lack of CPU is the root of all Armor tank problems. Also- Like I have said- I have wished since the beginning of time that we would have a huge massdriver trype main gun that fired quite slowly 20RPM but had huge splash damage and radius but infantry would probably cry. Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris
Harpyja Legio DXIV 2259	Posted - 2015.01.12 02:04:00 - [49] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Rain Da Pain wrote: I love the ammo idea! Ccp should add an option when you press x to edit the fitting of ammo type. Also with hardeners the madys should be 10% lower because they can tank higher but the add a 3% or something buff to large turrets with a mady Unfortunately the Madrugar actually rarely has more eHP than the Gunnlogi. When it comes to calculations, especially at higher levels your resistance values determined how powerful your eHP tank is rather than raw numbers. Since the Maximum stacked armour on the current Madrugar is 5885 and you have 25% resistance on that you have roughly 7356 armour and 1200 shields. Whereas on a Gunnlogi with its current statistics you can amass comparable eHP while advancing your natural resistances vs most AV forms due to lack of parity while additionally using one fitting module to stack armour for something like 7120 Shields and 2950 armour. Honestly if Gunnlogi were adjusted so that they could not stack armour as well as shields they'd almost be balanced tanks especially if hardeners were brought to parity. Moreover if Rattati adjusts tanks and adds one more On Rack Slot (primary tanking slot for tanks) then their hardeners would have to be adjusted anyway. You actually mentioned one thing I am really mystified by. Blasters, traditionally high DPS CQC weapons have the lowest DPS of all turrets while missiles, traditionally low DPS high alpha turrets have the most DPS. You just keep on hating large missile turrets, don't you? Of course something with the highest alpha damage will have the highest DPS, while it is firing. But then it needs to stop to reload and only then it achieves its lower DPS over time. You should be happy that large missiles actually had their DPS over time nerfed when shotgun style reloading was brought in because with max reload skills, their total reload time only decreases from 10 seconds down to 9 seconds as opposed to down to 7.5 seconds before shotgun style reload. Sorry True but I think you're just being plain ignorant. You claim the large missiles are broken and need to be toned down. Then tell me, why is it that a railgun Gunnlogi is the most effective at taking out other shield vehicles? Large missiles and railguns are perfectly fine, and railguns are actually the dominant ones on the field. Not because of skill requirements, but simply because they are the best at AV and balanced by the fact that they are the worst at AI. Large blasters need to be buffed, but not in the way I know you'd like them to be buffed which still won't be balanced. "By His light, and His will"- The Scriptures, 12:32
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 16502	Posted - 2015.01.12 02:25:00 - [50] - Quote Harpyja wrote: True Adamance wrote: Rain Da Pain wrote: I love the ammo idea! Ccp should add an option when you press x to edit the fitting of ammo type. Also with hardeners the madys should be 10% lower because they can tank higher but the add a 3% or something buff to large turrets with a mady Unfortunately the Madrugar actually rarely has more eHP than the Gunnlogi. When it comes to calculations, especially at higher levels your resistance values determined how powerful your eHP tank is rather than raw numbers. Since the Maximum stacked armour on the current Madrugar is 5885 and you have 25% resistance on that you have roughly 7356 armour and 1200 shields. Whereas on a Gunnlogi with its current statistics you can amass comparable eHP while advancing your natural resistances vs most AV forms due to lack of parity while additionally using one fitting module to stack armour for something like 7120 Shields and 2950 armour. Honestly if Gunnlogi were adjusted so that they could not stack armour as well as shields they'd almost be balanced tanks especially if hardeners were brought to parity. Moreover if Rattati adjusts tanks and adds one more On Rack Slot (primary tanking slot for tanks) then their hardeners would have to be adjusted anyway. You actually mentioned one thing I am really mystified by. Blasters, traditionally high DPS CQC weapons have the lowest DPS of all turrets while missiles, traditionally low DPS high alpha turrets have the most DPS. You just keep on hating large missile turrets, don't you? Of course something with the highest alpha damage will have the highest DPS, while it is firing. But then it needs to stop to reload and only then it achieves its lower DPS over time. You should be happy that large missiles actually had their DPS over time nerfed when shotgun style reloading was brought in because with max reload skills, their total reload time only decreases from 10 seconds down to 9 seconds as opposed to down to 7.5 seconds before shotgun style reload. Sorry True but I think you're just being plain ignorant. You claim the large missiles are broken and need to be toned down. Then tell me, why is it that a railgun Gunnlogi is the most effective at taking out other shield vehicles? Large missiles and railguns are perfectly fine, and railguns are actually the dominant ones on the field. Not because of skill requirements, but simply because they are the best at AV and balanced by the fact that they are the worst at AI. Large blasters need to be buffed, but not in the way I know you'd like them to be buffed which still won't be balanced. I used Large Missiles almost all time when I did play Dust 514 they still are the top tier of Dust's anti tank gameplay especially when maxed out with the appropriate skill points simply because of their prolific damage output in such a short amount of time. They do this in such a manner that Armour HAV are all but invalidated on the field and after which time a 9 second reload speed allows you dish out another X000 DPS. A little over 3000 vs shields and 4500 vs armour. Moreover as I have said I do not feel they are appropriate to be a proper MBT tank turret. I do not see rapid fire missile turrets..... Here Here Here Here or Here. Nor do I see TTK vs one specific kind of vehicle at less than three seconds. Every single game here arguably has a better vehicle vs vehicle engagement dynamic than Dust. *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.

Sir Dukey Murphys-Law General Tso's Alliance 1519	Posted - 2015.01.12 03:25:00 - [51] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Harpyja wrote: True Adamance wrote: Rain Da Pain wrote: I love the ammo idea! Ccp should add an option when you press x to edit the fitting of ammo type. Also with hardeners the madys should be 10% lower because they can tank higher but the add a 3% or something buff to large turrets with a mady Unfortunately the Madrugar actually rarely has more eHP than the Gunnlogi. When it comes to calculations, especially at higher levels your resistance values determined how powerful your eHP tank is rather than raw numbers. Since the Maximum stacked armour on the current Madrugar is 5885 and you have 25% resistance on that you have roughly 7356 armour and 1200 shields. Whereas on a Gunnlogi with its current statistics you can amass comparable eHP while advancing your natural resistances vs most AV forms due to lack of parity while additionally using one fitting module to stack armour for something like 7120 Shields and 2950 armour. Honestly if Gunnlogi were adjusted so that they could not stack armour as well as shields they'd almost be balanced tanks especially if hardeners were brought to parity. Moreover if Rattati adjusts tanks and adds one more On Rack Slot (primary tanking slot for tanks) then their hardeners would have to be adjusted anyway. You actually mentioned one thing I am really mystified by. Blasters, traditionally high DPS CQC weapons have the lowest DPS of all turrets while missiles, traditionally low DPS high alpha turrets have the most DPS. You just keep on hating large missile turrets, don't you? Of course something with the highest alpha damage will have the highest DPS, while it is firing. But then it needs to stop to reload and only then it achieves its lower DPS over time. You should be happy that large missiles actually had their DPS over time nerfed when shotgun style reloading was brought in because with max reload skills, their total reload time only decreases from 10 seconds down to 9 seconds as opposed to down to 7.5 seconds before shotgun style reload. Sorry True but I think you're just being plain ignorant. You claim the large missiles are broken and need to be toned down. Then tell me, why is it that a railgun Gunnlogi is the most effective at taking out other shield vehicles? Large missiles and railguns are perfectly fine, and railguns are actually the dominant ones on the field. Not because of skill requirements, but simply because they are the best at AV and balanced by the fact that they are the worst at AI. Large blasters need to be buffed, but not in the way I know you'd like them to be buffed which still won't be balanced. I used Large Missiles almost all time when I did play Dust 514 they still are the top tier of Dust's anti tank gameplay especially when maxed out with the appropriate skill points simply because of their prolific damage output in such a short amount of time. They do this in such a manner that Armour HAV are all but invalidated on the field and after which time a 9 second reload speed allows you dish out another X000 DPS. A little over 3000 vs shields and 4500 vs armour. Moreover as I have said I do not feel they are appropriate to be a proper MBT tank turret. I do not see rapid fire missile turrets..... Here Here Here Here or Here. Nor do I see TTK vs one specific kind of vehicle at less than three seconds. Every single game here arguably has a better vehicle vs vehicle engagement dynamic than Dust. Did any of those examples happen to take place in the future? Excluding the 4th one. Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris
Harpyja Legio DXIV 2259	Posted - 2015.01.12 03:45:00 - [52] - Quote True Adamance wrote: I used Large Missiles almost all time when I did play Dust 514 they still are the top tier of Dust's anti tank gameplay especially when maxed out with the appropriate skill points simply because of their prolific damage output in such a short amount of time. They do this in such a manner that Armour HAV are all but invalidated on the field and after which time a 9 second reload speed allows you dish out another X000 DPS. A little over 3000 vs shields and 4500 vs armour. Moreover as I have said I do not feel they are appropriate to be a proper MBT tank turret. I do not see rapid fire missile turrets..... Here Here Here Here or Here. Nor do I see TTK vs one specific kind of vehicle at less than three seconds. Every single game here arguably has a better vehicle vs vehicle engagement dynamic than Dust. You're right. Let's just scrap everything Dust has tried to acheive, make all HAVs standard with OHK artillery turrets and call vehicles finished. "By His light, and His will"- The Scriptures, 12:32
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 16506	Posted - 2015.01.12 03:48:00 - [53] - Quote Sir Dukey wrote: True Adamance wrote: Harpyja wrote: True Adamance wrote: Rain Da Pain wrote: I love the ammo idea! Ccp should add an option when you press x to edit the fitting of ammo type. Also with hardeners the madys should be 10% lower because they can tank higher but the add a 3% or something buff to large turrets with a mady Unfortunately the Madrugar actually rarely has more eHP than the Gunnlogi. When it comes to calculations, especially at higher levels your resistance values determined how powerful your eHP tank is rather than raw numbers. Since the Maximum stacked armour on the current Madrugar is 5885 and you have 25% resistance on that you have roughly 7356 armour and 1200 shields. Whereas on a Gunnlogi with its current statistics you can amass comparable eHP while advancing your natural resistances vs most AV forms due to lack of parity while additionally using one fitting module to stack armour for something like 7120 Shields and 2950 armour. Honestly if Gunnlogi were adjusted so that they could not stack armour as well as shields they'd almost be balanced tanks especially if hardeners were brought to parity. Moreover if Rattati adjusts tanks and adds one more On Rack Slot (primary tanking slot for tanks) then their hardeners would have to be adjusted anyway. You actually mentioned one thing I am really mystified by. Blasters, traditionally high DPS CQC weapons have the lowest DPS of all turrets while missiles, traditionally low DPS high alpha turrets have the most DPS. You just keep on hating large missile turrets, don't you? Of course something with the highest alpha damage will have the highest DPS, while it is firing. But then it needs to stop to reload and only then it achieves its lower DPS over time. You should be happy that large missiles actually had their DPS over time nerfed when shotgun style reloading was brought in because with max reload skills, their total reload time only decreases from 10 seconds down to 9 seconds as opposed to down to 7.5 seconds before shotgun style reload. Sorry True but I think you're just being plain ignorant. You claim the large missiles are broken and need to be toned down. Then tell me, why is it that a railgun Gunnlogi is the most effective at taking out other shield vehicles? Large missiles and railguns are perfectly fine, and railguns are actually the dominant ones on the field. Not because of skill requirements, but simply because they are the best at AV and balanced by the fact that they are the worst at AI. Large blasters need to be buffed, but not in the way I know you'd like them to be buffed which still won't be balanced. I used Large Missiles almost all time when I did play Dust 514 they still are the top tier of Dust's anti tank gameplay especially when maxed out with the appropriate skill points simply because of their prolific damage output in such a short amount of time. They do this in such a manner that Armour HAV are all but invalidated on the field and after which time a 9 second reload speed allows you dish out another X000 DPS. A little over 3000 vs shields and 4500 vs armour. Moreover as I have said I do not feel they are appropriate to be a proper MBT tank turret. I do not see rapid fire missile turrets..... Here Here Here Here or Here. Nor do I see TTK vs one specific kind of vehicle at less than three seconds. Every single game here arguably has a better vehicle vs vehicle engagement dynamic than Dust. Did any of those examples happen to take place in the future? Excluding the 4th one. That's a poor justification for a bad mechanic. Shall I show some Halo Footage? Star Wars Battlefront Footage? MechWarrior? Or the Battlefield 4 Levkov Hover Tank. *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
Sir Dukey Murphys-Law General Tso's Alliance 1519	Posted - 2015.01.12 03:56:00 - [54] - Quote True Adamance wrote: -crap- Here is a better question... Who are you to tell CCP what to do? I don't see other games out there like Dust 514. If you want Battlefield tanks in Dust. How about you go play Battlefield of what ever the hell you wanna play. Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 16506	Posted - 2015.01.12 03:57:00 - [55] - Quote Harpyja wrote: True Adamance wrote: I used Large Missiles almost all time when I did play Dust 514 they still are the top tier of Dust's anti tank gameplay especially when maxed out with the appropriate skill points simply because of their prolific damage output in such a short amount of time. They do this in such a manner that Armour HAV are all but invalidated on the field and after which time a 9 second reload speed allows you dish out another X000 DPS. A little over 3000 vs shields and 4500 vs armour. Moreover as I have said I do not feel they are appropriate to be a proper MBT tank turret. I do not see rapid fire missile turrets..... Here Here Here Here or Here. Nor do I see TTK vs one specific kind of vehicle at less than three seconds. Every single game here arguably has a better vehicle vs vehicle engagement dynamic than Dust. You're right. Let's just scrap everything Dust has tried to acheive, make all HAVs standard with OHK artillery turrets and call vehicles finished. I have not suggested we work based off of OHKO turrets. Merely powerful, high explosive shells, with appropriate recoil, re chambering, etc values which can be adjusted to make for interesting and unique main guns for each racial tank type. A Railgun might fire a single round with little to no projectile drop. An Artillery round might see projectile drop but have more explosive charge. A Large Laser might have no splash but also no fall off or ammo values to deal with. A Blaster might be a 1-3 round magazine that allows much faster projection of rounds (still with rather fair delays between the rounds and fair projectile drop). But I ask you. What HAS Dust tried to achieve with HAV (I refuse to call them tanks)? What does HAV mean? *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
Sir Dukey Murphys-Law General Tso's Alliance 1519	Posted - 2015.01.12 03:59:00 - [56] - Quote Harpyja wrote: True Adamance wrote: I used Large Missiles almost all time when I did play Dust 514 they still are the top tier of Dust's anti tank gameplay especially when maxed out with the appropriate skill points simply because of their prolific damage output in such a short amount of time. They do this in such a manner that Armour HAV are all but invalidated on the field and after which time a 9 second reload speed allows you dish out another X000 DPS. A little over 3000 vs shields and 4500 vs armour. Moreover as I have said I do not feel they are appropriate to be a proper MBT tank turret. I do not see rapid fire missile turrets..... Here Here Here Here or Here. Nor do I see TTK vs one specific kind of vehicle at less than three seconds. Every single game here arguably has a better vehicle vs vehicle engagement dynamic than Dust. You're right. Let's just scrap everything Dust has tried to acheive, make all HAVs standard with OHK artillery turrets and call vehicles finished. He's just butthurt that his Rep stacked Maddies can't take a clip from a damage modded Proto Missile Turret. He should probably reconsider his fit. Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 16506	Posted - 2015.01.12 04:02:00 - [57] - Quote Sir Dukey wrote: True Adamance wrote: -crap- Here is a better question... Who are you to tell CCP what to do? I don't see other games out there like Dust 514. If you want Battlefield tanks in Dust. How about you go play Battlefield of what ever the hell you wanna play. I do. This is why I no longer play Dust. I cannot justify calling Dust HAV "Tanks". As for who I am to tell them what is what? I'm no one to do any such thing. Just like you were no one to make similar comments in the many threads I have seen you post it. *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 16506	Posted - 2015.01.12 04:03:00 - [58] - Quote Sir Dukey wrote: Harpyja wrote: True Adamance wrote: I used Large Missiles almost all time when I did play Dust 514 they still are the top tier of Dust's anti tank gameplay especially when maxed out with the appropriate skill points simply because of their prolific damage output in such a short amount of time. They do this in such a manner that Armour HAV are all but invalidated on the field and after which time a 9 second reload speed allows you dish out another X000 DPS. A little over 3000 vs shields and 4500 vs armour. Moreover as I have said I do not feel they are appropriate to be a proper MBT tank turret. I do not see rapid fire missile turrets..... Here Here Here Here or Here. Nor do I see TTK vs one specific kind of vehicle at less than three seconds. Every single game here arguably has a better vehicle vs vehicle engagement dynamic than Dust. You're right. Let's just scrap everything Dust has tried to acheive, make all HAVs standard with OHK artillery turrets and call vehicles finished. He's just butthurt that his Rep stacked Maddies can't take a clip from a damage modded Proto Missile Turret. He should probably reconsider his fit. Nope I never used Triple Rep Maddies. Never much liked Tanks post 1.6. Much better game when Reps were active and we had 4-5 armour slots to work with. I could accept it one way or the other if Rattati came out and said what HE wants to do with vehicles and tanks and then can take it from there to provide relevant support. At the moment all I am doing is taking a pretty open ended invite from him to vomit forth my ideas on what I think Tanks should be like in Dust. *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
Sir Dukey Murphys-Law General Tso's Alliance 1519	Posted - 2015.01.12 04:05:00 - [59] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Sir Dukey wrote: True Adamance wrote: -crap- Here is a better question... Who are you to tell CCP what to do? I don't see other games out there like Dust 514. If you want Battlefield tanks in Dust. How about you go play Battlefield of what ever the hell you wanna play. I do. This is why I no longer play Dust. I cannot justify calling Dust HAV "Tanks". As for who I am to tell them what is what? I'm no one to do any such thing. Just like you were no one to make similar comments in the many threads I have seen you post it. Nobody asked to to play DUST 514. Also- I don't just come in and say "HerP DerP- I got killed by X-weapon remove because no game has the same weapon D3Rp H3RP" Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris
Sir Dukey Murphys-Law General Tso's Alliance 1519	Posted - 2015.01.12 04:06:00 - [60] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Sir Dukey wrote: Harpyja wrote: True Adamance wrote: I used Large Missiles almost all time when I did play Dust 514 they still are the top tier of Dust's anti tank gameplay especially when maxed out with the appropriate skill points simply because of their prolific damage output in such a short amount of time. They do this in such a manner that Armour HAV are all but invalidated on the field and after which time a 9 second reload speed allows you dish out another X000 DPS. A little over 3000 vs shields and 4500 vs armour. Moreover as I have said I do not feel they are appropriate to be a proper MBT tank turret. I do not see rapid fire missile turrets..... Here Here Here Here or Here. Nor do I see TTK vs one specific kind of vehicle at less than three seconds. Every single game here arguably has a better vehicle vs vehicle engagement dynamic than Dust. You're right. Let's just scrap everything Dust has tried to acheive, make all HAVs standard with OHK artillery turrets and call vehicles finished. He's just butthurt that his Rep stacked Maddies can't take a clip from a damage modded Proto Missile Turret. He should probably reconsider his fit. Nope I never used Triple Rep Maddies. Never much liked Tanks post 1.6. Much better game when Reps were active and we had 4-5 armour slots to work with. I could accept it one way or the other if Rattati came out and said what HE wants to do with vehicles and tanks and then can take it from there to provide relevant support. At the moment all I am doing is taking a pretty open ended invite from him to vomit forth my ideas on what I think Tanks should be like in Dust. Same, I liked tanks in Chromosome but still- I don't come in here asking to remove content. Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris

True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 16508	Posted - 2015.01.12 04:31:00 - [61] - Quote Sir Dukey wrote: True Adamance wrote: Sir Dukey wrote: True Adamance wrote: -crap- Here is a better question... Who are you to tell CCP what to do? I don't see other games out there like Dust 514. If you want Battlefield tanks in Dust. How about you go play Battlefield of what ever the hell you wanna play. I do. This is why I no longer play Dust. I cannot justify calling Dust HAV "Tanks". As for who I am to tell them what is what? I'm no one to do any such thing. Just like you were no one to make similar comments in the many threads I have seen you post it. Nobody asked to to play DUST 514. Also- I don't just come in and say "HerP DerP- I got killed by X-weapon remove because no game has the same weapon D3Rp H3RP" That's not what I am saying at all. I am suggesting that when a weapon like the missile launchers has the potential to dish out between 3000- 4000 DPS effectually nullifying one kind of vehicle type something is iffy. Imagine if there were a Laser turret in this game that dealt 4500 damage per second to Shield HAV? Would that be fair? Probably not. I know when it comes to tanks short TTK vs Multiple Damage Modded Shield Tanks (the only ones that can do this right now) is a complete turn off. It's not clever gameplay at all, you are not being cunning by using this kind of fit. You are simply doing something most of the time (Armour Tanked Damage Modding a Shield Tank) should not be possible. I have did not start to notice how powerful it was until I was getting DPSed down by it in a Double Extender, Single Hardener fit which roughly should have a very high level of durability vs that kind of tank. I have presented an argument in which I outline two main things. One is that the DPS of the Missile Turret is by comparison to the others much greater if you are willing to look at it vs Rails it is 3.5x that of any other turret. This being the case when according to examples in EVE Missiles are not DPS weapons but instead alpha weapons firing in volleys, and even the smaller variants called rockets are in most cases no higher in terms of DPS than other turret types. Secondly that it completely removes any semblance of competitiveness from one type of tank when it is arrayed against it with no equivalent counter to balance it out. Perhaps instead of the idea to remove content from the game I might suggest an alteration to the content. Either way it is not something you would like to be quite frank. It would mean the Large Missile Launcher would have to be adjusted in such a manner is that other turrets become competitive with it. *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
Harpyja Legio DXIV 2260	Posted - 2015.01.12 05:49:00 - [62] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Sir Dukey wrote: True Adamance wrote: Sir Dukey wrote: True Adamance wrote: -crap- Here is a better question... Who are you to tell CCP what to do? I don't see other games out there like Dust 514. If you want Battlefield tanks in Dust. How about you go play Battlefield of what ever the hell you wanna play. I do. This is why I no longer play Dust. I cannot justify calling Dust HAV "Tanks". As for who I am to tell them what is what? I'm no one to do any such thing. Just like you were no one to make similar comments in the many threads I have seen you post it. Nobody asked to to play DUST 514. Also- I don't just come in and say "HerP DerP- I got killed by X-weapon remove because no game has the same weapon D3Rp H3RP" That's not what I am saying at all. I am suggesting that when a weapon like the missile launchers has the potential to dish out between 3000- 4000 DPS effectually nullifying one kind of vehicle type something is iffy. Imagine if there were a Laser turret in this game that dealt 4500 damage per second to Shield HAV? Would that be fair? Probably not. I know when it comes to tanks short TTK vs Multiple Damage Modded Shield Tanks (the only ones that can do this right now) is a complete turn off. It's not clever gameplay at all, you are not being cunning by using this kind of fit. You are simply doing something most of the time (Armour Tanked Damage Modding a Shield Tank) should not be possible. I have did not start to notice how powerful it was until I was getting DPSed down by it in a Double Extender, Single Hardener fit which roughly should have a very high level of durability vs that kind of tank. I have presented an argument in which I outline two main things. One is that the DPS of the Missile Turret is by comparison to the others much greater if you are willing to look at it vs Rails it is 3.5x that of any other turret. This being the case when according to examples in EVE Missiles are not DPS weapons but instead alpha weapons firing in volleys, and even the smaller variants called rockets are in most cases no higher in terms of DPS than other turret types. Secondly that it completely removes any semblance of competitiveness from one type of tank when it is arrayed against it with no equivalent counter to balance it out. Perhaps instead of the idea to remove content from the game I might suggest an alteration to the content. Either way it is not something you would like to be quite frank. It would mean the Large Missile Launcher would have to be adjusted in such a manner is that other turrets become competitive with it. If you think that missile Gunnlogis are unbeatable, you are mistaken. I've been beaten by Madrugars that have been cleverly fit with a fuel injector which makes them zip back and forth constantly and causing the majority of my missiles to miss. Railgun Gunnlogis beat missile Gunnlogis hands down, and is why my go-to fit for taking out a missile Gunnlogi (or any Gunnlogi regardless of turret type) is my Particle Cannon / extender / hardener / damage amp fit. You want armor tanking removed or reduced on shield HAVs? That's fine by me. Only need to increase armor PG costs and buff armor vehicle PG resources accordingly. But I also want the chassis upgrades back so I can fit those instead of low tier armor mods. "By His light, and His will"- The Scriptures, 12:32
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 2720	Posted - 2015.01.12 06:09:00 - [63] - Quote Harpyja wrote: If you think that missile Gunnlogis are unbeatable, you are mistaken. I've been beaten by Madrugars that have been cleverly fit with a fuel injector which makes them zip back and forth constantly and causing the majority of my missiles to miss. Railgun Gunnlogis beat missile Gunnlogis hands down, and is why my go-to fit for taking out a missile Gunnlogi (or any Gunnlogi regardless of turret type) is my Particle Cannon / extender / hardener / damage amp fit. You want armor tanking removed or reduced on shield HAVs? That's fine by me. Only need to increase armor PG costs and buff armor vehicle PG resources accordingly. But I also want the chassis upgrades back so I can fit those instead of low tier armor mods. I sometimes try to take out a shield missile tank with an armor blaster tank for the lolz. And also to see how good the pilot is. I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
Rain Da Pain Dead Man's Game RUST415 4	Posted - 2015.01.12 07:30:00 - [64] - Quote Sir Dukey wrote: True Adamance wrote: -crap- Here is a better question... Who are you to tell CCP what to do? I don't see other games out there like Dust 514. If you want Battlefield tanks in Dust. How about you go play Battlefield of what ever the hell you wanna play. That's the whole point of an idea section on the games forums. Just saying
Thaddeus Reynolds Facepunch Security 145	Posted - 2015.01.12 07:34:00 - [65] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Rain Da Pain wrote: I love the ammo idea! Ccp should add an option when you press x to edit the fitting of ammo type. Also with hardeners the madys should be 10% lower because they can tank higher but the add a 3% or something buff to large turrets with a mady Unfortunately the Madrugar actually rarely has more eHP than the Gunnlogi. When it comes to calculations, especially at higher levels your resistance values determined how powerful your eHP tank is rather than raw numbers. Since the Maximum stacked armour on the current Madrugar is 5885 and you have 25% resistance on that you have roughly 7356 armour and 1200 shields. Whereas on a Gunnlogi with its current statistics you can amass comparable eHP while advancing your natural resistances vs most AV forms due to lack of parity while additionally using one fitting module to stack armour for something like 7120 Shields and 2950 armour. Honestly if Gunnlogi were adjusted so that they could not stack armour as well as shields they'd almost be balanced tanks especially if hardeners were brought to parity. Moreover if Rattati adjusts tanks and adds one more On Rack Slot (primary tanking slot for tanks) then their hardeners would have to be adjusted anyway. You actually mentioned one thing I am really mystified by. Blasters, traditionally high DPS CQC weapons have the lowest DPS of all turrets while missiles, traditionally low DPS high alpha turrets have the most DPS. I think proper balancing of the "Missile" Turrets in Dust needs to come from looking at the RLML turrets from Eve...(they need a longer reload delay and reload time to average out the DPS...smaller overall tweaks) but the HAVs don't all necessarily need to function like Stereotypical Tanks...I think we'd have a much more interesting game if we though of the HAV hull as something similar to the Rhino/Land Raider Chassis...a useful Multirol Platform that can function well in multiple rolls depending on how it's kitted out Khanid Logi and Tanker, sometimes AV Heavy or Sniper. I believe all these roles are support for front line soldiers.
Rain Da Pain Dead Man's Game RUST415 4	Posted - 2015.01.12 07:40:00 - [66] - Quote I have been killed in one volly by a Proto missile tank when I had one hardener and around 4.3k shield?! Also I have been gunned down by it when I was running an infantry fit, but yet a massive tank railgun gets a slow speed with the accuracy of a rabbit trying to snipe can't have any splash? Mind blown
CommanderBolt KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 2989	Posted - 2015.01.12 08:41:00 - [67] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Rain Da Pain wrote: So if I sit on a roof and forge gun someone that's not the same thing? They are not 'meant' to kill infantry! It's not a slaying turret anyway but it would give tankers a hand against op av if I can hit a scout with an assault forge body shot, you can figure out how to clip a scout with a rail turret To be fair mate, that really isn't the same thing. I know you are trying to point out the skill of a body shot with the charge time prediction of the assault variant of forges but if you didn't hit him with a body shot you would still splash damage them. Also if you were using a breach or a standard forge, you can hold the charge which makes lining up a shot all that much more convenient. Like someone else mentioned, it is a different thing when you are targeting someone who is unaware of you. A rail turret is fixed to a grounded tank chassis, it is way more restricted in terms of movement and aiming than a forge gunner is. Now having said that, I am not so sure about giving them splash back. I kind of like the idea personally however I do know that others have objections to this, so I try to keep that in mind. Vitantur Nothus wrote: Why hide a solution under frothy pile of derpa? MY LIFE FOR AIUR!
CommanderBolt KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 2989	Posted - 2015.01.12 08:43:00 - [68] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Harpyja wrote: If you think that missile Gunnlogis are unbeatable, you are mistaken. I've been beaten by Madrugars that have been cleverly fit with a fuel injector which makes them zip back and forth constantly and causing the majority of my missiles to miss. Railgun Gunnlogis beat missile Gunnlogis hands down, and is why my go-to fit for taking out a missile Gunnlogi (or any Gunnlogi regardless of turret type) is my Particle Cannon / extender / hardener / damage amp fit. You want armor tanking removed or reduced on shield HAVs? That's fine by me. Only need to increase armor PG costs and buff armor vehicle PG resources accordingly. But I also want the chassis upgrades back so I can fit those instead of low tier armor mods. I sometimes try to take out a shield missile tank with an armor blaster tank for the lolz. And also to see how good the pilot is. If you are a good driver and can take them in favourable terrain (i.e open areas) you can just about strafe around them and kill them but yea I agree, it is a hard thing to do. Vitantur Nothus wrote: Why hide a solution under frothy pile of derpa? MY LIFE FOR AIUR!
shaman oga Dead Man's Game 3666	Posted - 2015.01.12 10:19:00 - [69] - Quote Large rails has turned into a hard mode sniper rifle a little AOE is due. I wonder how many kills rail turrets AOE have caused after the first nerf to come to the decision of completely eliminating splash damage. With the lack of mobility of large rails a little AOE is needed, more to destroy equipments than to kill infantry. If CCP care about people camping nodes from safe spots, they should protect nodes with barrages like they did on manus peak map, not eliminate a vital feature of a turret. Situational awareness also known as passive scan. Minmatar omni-merc
Rain Da Pain Dead Man's Game RUST415 5	Posted - 2015.01.12 15:12:00 - [70] - Quote shaman oga wrote: Large rails has turned into a hard mode sniper rifle a little AOE is due. I wonder how many kills rail turrets AOE have caused after the first nerf to come to the decision of completely eliminating splash damage. With the lack of mobility of large rails a little AOE is needed, more to destroy equipments than to kill infantry. If CCP care about people camping nodes from safe spots, they should protect nodes with barrages like they did on manus peak map, not eliminate a vital feature of a turret. Large Railguns= underpowered vs av

taxi bastard Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 294	Posted - 2015.01.12 15:15:00 - [71] - Quote Rain Da Pain wrote: Ccp have you ever tried hitting a cal scout with Proto swarms with a railgun? Impossible! At least with splash it would make it somewhat ' easy' even a 25% splash! That's only around 250 dmg! With the slow rof it would not be op at all! put a man in the turret - if you want splash use a small missile turret for the guy
Harpyja Legio DXIV 2260	Posted - 2015.01.12 15:19:00 - [72] - Quote shaman oga wrote: Large rails has turned into a hard mode sniper rifle a little AOE is due. I wonder how many kills rail turrets AOE have caused after the first nerf to come to the decision of completely eliminating splash damage. With the lack of mobility of large rails a little AOE is needed, more to destroy equipments than to kill infantry. If CCP care about people camping nodes from safe spots, they should protect nodes with barrages like they did on manus peak map, not eliminate a vital feature of a turret. I definitely agree on having some splash for eliminating equipment. How can equipment survive a hypersonic slug impacting the ground just millimeters away from it? If CCP is so concerned about splash damage wrecking infantry, at least give rails a 1 meter splash radius. "By His light, and His will"- The Scriptures, 12:32
Rain Da Pain Dead Man's Game RUST415 5	Posted - 2015.01.12 17:21:00 - [73] - Quote Harpyja wrote: shaman oga wrote: Large rails has turned into a hard mode sniper rifle a little AOE is due. I wonder how many kills rail turrets AOE have caused after the first nerf to come to the decision of completely eliminating splash damage. With the lack of mobility of large rails a little AOE is needed, more to destroy equipments than to kill infantry. If CCP care about people camping nodes from safe spots, they should protect nodes with barrages like they did on manus peak map, not eliminate a vital feature of a turret. I definitely agree on having some splash for eliminating equipment. How can equipment survive a hypersonic slug impacting the ground just millimeters away from it? If CCP is so concerned about splash damage wrecking infantry, at least give rails a 1 meter splash radius. 1m would be ok but something like 3m at basic to 5 m at Proto would be much better and fair
Sir Dukey Murphys-Law General Tso's Alliance 1521	Posted - 2015.01.12 21:23:00 - [74] - Quote Rain Da Pain wrote: I have been killed in one volly by a Proto missile tank when I had one hardener and around 4.3k shield?! Also I have been gunned down by it when I was running an infantry fit, but yet a massive tank railgun gets a slow speed with the accuracy of a rabbit trying to snipe can't have any splash? Mind blown That is a lie. Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris
Sir Dukey Murphys-Law General Tso's Alliance 1521	Posted - 2015.01.12 21:26:00 - [75] - Quote Harpyja wrote: shaman oga wrote: Large rails has turned into a hard mode sniper rifle a little AOE is due. I wonder how many kills rail turrets AOE have caused after the first nerf to come to the decision of completely eliminating splash damage. With the lack of mobility of large rails a little AOE is needed, more to destroy equipments than to kill infantry. If CCP care about people camping nodes from safe spots, they should protect nodes with barrages like they did on manus peak map, not eliminate a vital feature of a turret. I definitely agree on having some splash for eliminating equipment. How can equipment survive a hypersonic slug impacting the ground just millimeters away from it? If CCP is so concerned about splash damage wrecking infantry, at least give rails a 1 meter splash radius. What CCP is thinking is that Railgun shots shouldn't have splash damage and that is OK but i'm pretty sure that a Railgun Round is atleast one or two meters in diameter. Therefore, the rounds should behave like 9mm bullets. Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 16516	Posted - 2015.01.12 21:35:00 - [76] - Quote Sir Dukey wrote: Harpyja wrote: shaman oga wrote: Large rails has turned into a hard mode sniper rifle a little AOE is due. I wonder how many kills rail turrets AOE have caused after the first nerf to come to the decision of completely eliminating splash damage. With the lack of mobility of large rails a little AOE is needed, more to destroy equipments than to kill infantry. If CCP care about people camping nodes from safe spots, they should protect nodes with barrages like they did on manus peak map, not eliminate a vital feature of a turret. I definitely agree on having some splash for eliminating equipment. How can equipment survive a hypersonic slug impacting the ground just millimeters away from it? If CCP is so concerned about splash damage wrecking infantry, at least give rails a 1 meter splash radius. What CCP is thinking is that Railgun shots shouldn't have splash damage and that is OK but i'm pretty sure that a Railgun Round is atleast one or two meters in diameter. Therefore, the rounds should behave like 9mm bullets. The penetrative power of a railgun would be so immense I doubt you'd necessarily need anything more than 100-150mm. Even then it seems kind of like over kill to me. Not like out Tanks have the same calibre of shielding or armour as space vessels so 150mm which is used in space combat would wreck face. *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
Rain Da Pain Dead Man's Game RUST415 5	Posted - 2015.01.13 00:07:00 - [77] - Quote So in reality the railgun would have a huge splash probably severing your legs from you body :) but for the sake of balancing a 25% splash would be good. Ccp please say weather it's possible to add or not!
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 16530	Posted - 2015.01.13 00:14:00 - [78] - Quote Rain Da Pain wrote: So in reality the railgun would have a huge splash probably severing your legs from you body :) but for the sake of balancing a 25% splash would be good. Ccp please say weather it's possible to add or not! Hmmmm likely one of the lesser explosive charge of such weapons.....to knowledge, and I'm prepared to revise my opinion if proven wrong, the design features of railgun projectiles revolved around penetrating the armour of the target rather than damaging it through explosive force. 25% of a railgun would be a little too much 20% might do or even 17.5%. *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
Lahut K'mar Royal Uhlans Amarr Empire 14	Posted - 2015.01.13 00:21:00 - [79] - Quote Get a gunner. Small turrets are there for infantry. Horrifying? That's a strange way to spell "romantic". FIX THE WHEEL, CCP!
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 16531	Posted - 2015.01.13 00:40:00 - [80] - Quote Lahut K'mar wrote: Get a gunner. Small turrets are there for infantry. Indeed. And Large are for vehicles am I right? Thus if changes are made like this the appropriate destructive force should be applied on the main gun of a tank. Thus AoE is somewhat necessary. *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.

Rain Da Pain Dead Man's Game RUST415 5	Posted - 2015.01.13 07:40:00 - [81] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Lahut K'mar wrote: Get a gunner. Small turrets are there for infantry. Indeed. And Large are for vehicles am I right? Thus if changes are made like this the appropriate destructive force should be applied on the main gun of a tank. Thus AoE is somewhat necessary. Do you know how much weaker a tank with a turret is compared to not?
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 16549	Posted - 2015.01.13 10:07:00 - [82] - Quote Rain Da Pain wrote: True Adamance wrote: Lahut K'mar wrote: Get a gunner. Small turrets are there for infantry. Indeed. And Large are for vehicles am I right? Thus if changes are made like this the appropriate destructive force should be applied on the main gun of a tank. Thus AoE is somewhat necessary. Do you know how much weaker a tank with a turret is compared to not? Very. If you have two gunners you have an additional 1000 DPS, if you use small railguns, over your opponent. Which is a huge advantage over other tanks. Not only do you have 2 extra pairs of eyes to spot enemies on the map with high damage precision guns but you can use one of your crew to access the mini map and direct you/ communicate you the movements of enemy ground and air vehicles. So many people underestimate the level of teamwork and trust and pilot and his gunner have. If I could I'd love to have Ceej and Thal crew my tank ever game since I one hundred per cent trust them to be able to communicate threats and react to my own calls. *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.


Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online/DUST514, the EVE/DUST514 logo, EVE/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to OMG Labs to use EVE Online/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, OMG Labs. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.

No one does it better than PIE

Lasers4life

"Jesus!" yelled the blues "No, my name is Forever"

Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris

Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris

Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris

Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris

Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris

Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris

Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris

Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris

Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris

Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris

Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris

Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris

Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris

MY LIFE FOR AIUR!

MY LIFE FOR AIUR!

Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris

Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris