Or don't use a basic blaster fit.

These kind of arguments don't even make sense.

I decided to put a few of the proposed large turret attributes into graphs/plots. My suggestions will be at the end of this post.

Link

-First graph: Damage Over Time

*This graph simulates damage over time if each turret were to begin shooting at time=0s. The large missile launcher and blaster turret have no charge-up, so they start off with a non-zero damage value, whereas the large railgun starts at time=0.35s.

There's a few things I want to point out that I find striking. Even though the large railgun has the least DPS, it manages to maintain the highest damage dealt at any given point. Note that the blaster and railgun are graphed up to one shot before overheat (railgun overheats on the fifth and blaster overheats on the 32nd). Unfortunately there is no cooldown time given so far, meaning that this was the furthest I could plot the graph.

However, one thing that you should see is how the large missile launcher compares with the other two. It will deal the least amount of damage but has the longest reload time. I believe it is safe to say that the cooldown times on the large railgun and blaster will be much shorter than the reload time. This means that over any given period of time, the large missile launcher will always have the least amount of accumulated damage dealt.

-Second graph: Damage Per Clip Vs Reload Time

The large missile turret stands out like a sore thumb in this graph. It deals the least amount of damage per clip, yet suffers from the longest reload time.

-Third graph: CPU Vs PG

Again, the large missile turret sticks out. It costs more CPU and PG than the large railgun.

-My suggestions:
I think that it is fair to say that the large missile launcher will not be competitive. It deals the least amount of damage per clip, which also happens to be smaller than the amount of damage the large blaster and railgun deal to overheat, but also has the longest reload time. Something needs to change.

I think the best option that would put the large missile launcher into a competitive position is if it actually has the fastest reload time. I am basing this suggestion off of the first two graphs. Having a reload time that is about as long as the cooldown time on the large railgun and blaster means that it will not lag behind in damage application over time. This will put its reload time at around 6 seconds (based off of current cooldown times IIRC), which makes an almost linear fit on the second graph.

Another thing that needs to change which I have noticed ever since 1.7, is that the PG cost of the large missile launcher needs to be less than the large railgun. The large missile launcher has the highest CPU cost of all of the turrets, so it is reasonable that it should have the smallest PG cost. Making a linear curve of best fit on the third graph will put its PG cost at about 700.

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.

DHAV gives missiles and blasters at least 25% permanent bonus at level 5, rails will not get bonus.

DHAV will push forward and backwards over and over so only half the rail shots connect due to poor tracking.

So the large missile launcher will only be viable on the Caldari DHAV, and nothing else? You've missed the point I was trying to make. Each turret should be equally viable, independent of which hull you put it on. The DHAV is only there for specialization, not for making a useless turret viable.

Look at the turrets themselves, and forget about the hulls for the moment. What if every infantry weapon was only viable on one dropsuit and each dropsuit only affected one weapon? You wouldn't like that, would you?

What, like amar assault's and scrambler? Commandos with sniper rifles, rail rifles ( cal) and swarms ( min), assault rifles and gal assault... Sounds like Dust to me..

If you drive a missile tank, that isn't a DHAV, up to the front of a rail tank and just sit there, then you asked to get popped.

You still don't get it, do you? It shouldn't take a role bonus just so that a useless weapon is on par with another weapon that requires no bonuses to be useful?

Stop trolling around and go find some other game to ruin.

Will you guys stop calling standard stuff basic!? Also you guys realize that proto hardeners give the same damage reduction as militia, so stop comparing stuff to specifically proto hardeners.

why so mad though lol

if you can't figure away out to use your highslots properly for a missile tank fit with 5 highs on shields and 3 highs on armor then i don't know what to say other than don't park your missile tank in front of rails and just hold down fire expecting +75 +75 +50.

Try using rails, it seems more your style if you can't manage with 8000 insta damage and unskilled 12 sec reload.

why so mad though lol

if you can't figure away out to use your highslots properly for a missile tank fit with 5 highs on shields and 3 highs on armor then i don't know what to say other than don't park your missile tank in front of rails and just hold down fire expecting +75 +75 +50.

Try using rails, it seems more your style if you can't manage with 8000 insta damage and unskilled 12 sec reload.

Please, I didn't make the graphs and an attempt at constructive feedback to show that the large missile launcher is not on par with the other turrets only to have you come around and try to make senseless arguments and claims that it's perfectly fine for a weapon to be useless if there's a role bonus that puts it on par with the other weapons.

Lol at player who suggests a main gun that fires every 1.8 seconds takes skill to use.

They are nice graphs

The missile turret does lots of damage before the rail even gets a shot off. Good time for missile tank to take cover or move on to a target 12 seconds away.

I understand what you are trying to say, but we have different opinions with regard to your worries.

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

charts

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.

Harpya, can you make an extended chart that continues to show damage over longer periods of time? I would like too see how long each turret needs to hit a damage threshold. Lets just say how long will each tank need to empty the entire ammo supply, and chart that damage over time.

That way, we can see if several full clip bursts from missiles can out pace blaster damage. And how much blaster/rail damage can be done after each cooldown/reload?

A s in Time x axis, damage y axis and the line graph marking the total damage over time until each tank finishes ther ammo supply.

I've used all turrets since day 1, mostly blaster.

Been a long time since GWA man, sorry for hazy memories. I do remember you being a bada$$ though so there's that

Blasters have been my thing since I started using Gallente tanks back in 1.3 or whenever it was...... loved em to bits then because I had the ability basically apply my turret to universally good ranges.... having played more game with tanks in them.....the blaster is woefully inappropriate for main tank turret.

Chuck it on an MAV hull and boom you have IFV's which would be awesome....... but tanks in Dust...... simply don't act like tanks..... where's the ordinance? the explosive force of the rounds? The ranges?

Artys are what you're looking for. A blaster is not.

Still going for Shotty turret, and current blaster design as medium turrets does sound like a great idea, which is why I asked for it a long time ago.

A Blaster COULD be a turret I would use. Shotgun could work if it is implemented correctly. Keep those auto shotguns away from its design and you might have a winner.

Thaddeus said burst fire could work as well but you'd need a proper down time between the bursts.

I don't care if it's full auto or semi auto (although burst fire shotty would be weird, I'd have to play with that), as long as it's a shotty, and it has a decent damage application and a good enough spread to apply decent damage to a enemy HAV within like 45m, I would probably like it.

EDIT: You were asking for a turret made to be explosive ordinance type cannon sort of thing. That fits artys to the T as far as I've seen looking at consensus on concepts (either a direct cannon similar to that of modern day tanks, or indirect howitzer similar to that of self propelled guns). A blaster doesn't really, as it's both not long range weapons, as well as not very explosive in nature comparing to that of artys, hell even Rockets or missiles fits you better.