Is it possible that we'll also see some semblance of racial parity from this too?

It's 2 meters at 234HP, you will have an hard time 2 shot a sentinel, but that is fair, splash must be for defense, not for offense.

HAV vs HAV TTK are fine imho, i would like to keep the TTK short if one tank manage to ambush the other, i've also managed to destroy more than 1 HAV in a short time when i ambushed them.

Frontal assault when both tanks activate modules take a good amount of time and are also attracting AV attention, if we raise the TTK, even if one tank destroy the other, then the AV will have enough time to esily destroy the remaining tank.
This is also to take in consideration, if to destroy another tank, i have to waste mine because AV, then i will rather go AV myself to destroy the enemy tank and not lose mine.

what level turret? and youre fitting this on a gunnlogi or maddy? either way youre only good for a single 1v1 bout. the gunnlogi turns into glass, and a maddy with that fit would need cpu mod, so glass fit again. thats hardly an OP tank.

maybe i should start tossing the word "efficient" around. the missile launcher is "efficient" like a SCR lol.

thing is though, missile arent used in PC. they arent even used in serious tanking. anyone that is pissed off at a tank that wants to kill it with a tank, is going to get a dual tank gunnlogi with a railgun.

Which is what I have been saying as well, this thread is about making all three turrets viable.

So we LBX-10 the blaster turret? Changing it from a high RoF 'precision' weapon into vehicular shotgun turret? I can get behind this.

It's called being rewarded with +50 for a kill because of proper aim.

It works for infantry, why shouldn't it work for us?

This is not a "them vs us" situation, anyone who thinks it is on either side shouldn't be involved here.

If you're not willing to behave or discuss things like a rational adult to create a healthy gameplay experience for all involved you need to gtfo because your opinions are neither wanted nor are they constructive.

1. It wasnt the question and the answer to the question is correct

1. It wasnt the question

2. The question was and still is this - Name a weapon that does 2000 DPS while rewarding people with +50 that isn't a heavy missile turret
2a. Name a weapon - It didnt have to include maths
2b. The weapon in question had to do over 2000DPS - A FG does a strike in less than 1second
2c. It had to get 50+ for a kill

3. When using BFG i can kill a target and get 50+ - The strike itselft does over 2000 in less than a second - Didnt have to include charge up time because DPS is a useless stats due to most AV weapons and turrets do not do damage every second

1. Does it do 400damage every second for 5seconds? Yes or no?

Constant shitposting is never constructive, rattati told you that much in the other thread. Maybe he needed to use smaller words so you could understand.

You are the one who is failing to uphold the basic rules of rational discussion here. You are also still treating it as an 'us vs them' issue, which really when it comes from you means "I am the only person who should ever get to provide any feedback on this topic. No one else should have a say". I'm pretty sure rattati also includes in his comments that he doesn't give a **** about any of your feedback as you're a biased little bigot that has repeatedly demonstrated that you cannot discuss things in good faith - non-verbatim of course.

Trust me, Lazer is Takahiro.

They're in lockstep because they're in lockstep.

I stopped drinking the koolaid long ago, Spkr never did.

Compare old posts from Takahiro to posts from Lazer.

Lol abusing his power? You speak like this is supposed to be a democracy.

Blamm couldn't even figure out which direction was up on a turret, I'm not going to simply go off his misguided vision for the sake of precedent.

You have to ask yourself though, will it be alright if skilled pilots use the large blaster to slaughter infantry and at the same time maneuver around to get in close to other HAVs and destroy them as well?

Or will infantry start crying foul that blaster HAVs are indestructible and have the large blaster subsequently nerfed?

Link to Another Spreadsheet

Gathered up the stats from space-side turrets for reference to people working on ideas. I'll work on infantry portable weapons tomorrow (or later today depending on when I have time). I didn't include Space-Side Missiles, because their Damage Application works quite differently from that of the turrets (lack of tracking is the big one)

You guys know how the assault scrambler rifle fires right? No noticeable recoil and has dispersion, but that dispersion doesn't increase the longer you fire.

My point is basically what I've said in post #98: Give the large blaster a bit more dispersion, but make that dispersion barely increase while being fired continuously.
That way it would be consistently hard to kill infantry with, continuous fire against vehicles would work at close-medium range like it should, and everyone will be happy.

Also if the DPS is too high, think the RoF increase was bad, and would indirectly make killing infantry easier, here's a compromise:
Change the fire interval to 0.12 (500 instead of 600 RPM), so the raw alpha dps and damage to overheat would be 1,667dps and 1,820dmg respectively.

Not even a large missile turret?

You are avoiding the question and we all know it is excessive.

Also right now we have an underpowered 0.975k DPS large blaster, what do you suggest to fix it?

What do you guys thing about my solution to large blaster dispersion?

OK, and if you succeeded, would you want to keep the way dispersion is on large blasters or change it?

i would say that blasters and missiles are swapping places in this, and that kind of TTK isn't what we're asking for. We want it to go up, not down.

Blasters aren't the worst AV right now.. I rather them being more like large turrets than preforming like souped up versions of infantry weapons. The Blaster should be a slow firing heavy hitting weapon with the clip of about 75.

Breakin, one point of contention. Are you sure your blaster damage is enough to stop shield regen? No point in any amount of dps if it can't do that.

And a rail or missile can't break a Maddy in 30 seconds?

I've stayed quiet for too long. Here's the deal folks.

I have full V everything blaster, and can watch a SICA go hardened, and watch the damage stop. I got the pure cold drop on a gunni only to have it harden, start regen, and turbo off into the redline sunset.
Edit: Forgot to mention, I don't even go after armor tanks because if they have a rep and a hardener, see youtube link.
Yes.
I have killed fledgling tankers in their badly fit MLT tanks with ease. ...
With ions and a blaster dmg mod.

Our range sucks.
Our dispersion sucks.
Our DPS is a joke.

And that's versus VEHICLES.

First I must say, Ratti-man, I love you. Idk how one dude can make the difference you have, but keep it up.

Now the taboo.

A solo-fit rail is 90% of the time far far away from viable AV threats.

A solo -fit missile can suppress AV.

A solo-fit blaster is, well, yeah Tommy.

The AV players know, that on foot, versus blaster, they have a 7-9% chance of dying. They just run straight at you dripping saliva and disgorging all manner of AV. (I do it... can confirm) Of course the AV players will bellow "oh GG man, you just can't aim" *cough* When blasters worked, if you rushed me in an AV suit, I would pop your grape. ( I still hear that loverly sound with my ARR so it's all good)

The Rattati-man himself has spoken and declared blasters AV, and I respect that. But they are now in a place that even with skill, it can make you respec.
The blaster was the tank that kept foot AV off the rangers, and turned the tide in a blitz with multiple tanks. Simple as that.
My feels was to drive through the smoldering hull of my enemy after I ran him through.
Now I feel like this: http://youtu.be/Zy7OdvPvFyU The hare, obviously.

Maybe a 7-10m radius that has very low dispersion? Maybe raise large turret a tiny hair and give us lower aim? Reduce dispersion, but give an AI dmg penalty? Idk if that would be a coding nightmare or not. If "be suppressed" is always the only option, I will just stop tanking for good.


TL;DR - Blasters have been nerfed to a state where foot AV can just have their way with you. Nolo contendere. We have to be close to fight. Can we fix this without breaking balance?


p.s. I pulse my blasters in 3-5 round braps to avoid dispersion and heat and can still barely get shots on a tank rusher. Try hitting a scout that's sprinting, jumping, tossing grenades, and remotes, and plasma, with a gun that does shoot where you aim it... lol oh wait

It was good before 1.8.

Basic blaster doesn't do enough damage to proto hardened shields doesn't mean nerf shields or buff basic blaster, make it so ion cannon will fit on madrugar.

How many times do I have to say that I'm commenting about the ideas, not the person?