DUST Search - The GEK should not be a legitimate anti-tank weapon

All Channels

General Discussions

The GEK should not be a legitimate anti-tank weapon

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Spkr4theDead Namtar Elite Gallente Federation 22	Posted - 2013.01.14 03:22:00 - [1] - Quote Stop demanding that tanks get nerfed, this shouldn't be an infantry-only game. If you want that, you might as well go to Call of Duty.
aden slayer ZionTCD Legacy Rising 407	Posted - 2013.01.14 03:34:00 - [2] - Quote Wut?
Spkr4theDead Namtar Elite Gallente Federation 22	Posted - 2013.01.14 03:50:00 - [3] - Quote aden slayer wrote: Wut? Troll fail
Logi Bro ZionTCD Legacy Rising 836	Posted - 2013.01.14 03:55:00 - [4] - Quote Where is this coming from? Small arms fire doesn't do **** to HAVs.
Foley Jones R.I.f.t 122	Posted - 2013.01.14 03:56:00 - [5] - Quote .........................................................................................................................................wut...........................................................
Leither Yiltron KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 417	Posted - 2013.01.14 04:07:00 - [6] - Quote I agree. Ever since the implementation of super advanced space unicorns as a mode of transportation, the whole game has shifted from a balance between vehicles and infantry as viable career roles to completely infantry. Obviously if there was more friendship to power our unicorns, we would all be better off, but with all the whiners here the only answer I can possibly give is blue, and also 42.
DJINN leukoplast Hellstorm Inc League of Infamy 288	Posted - 2013.01.14 04:20:00 - [7] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Stop demanding that tanks get nerfed, this shouldn't be an infantry-only game. If you want that, you might as well go to Call of Duty. Well it shouldn't be a tanking-only game either.
Iron Wolf Saber BetaMax. 2866	Posted - 2013.01.14 04:22:00 - [8] - Quote It takes about a squad of 20 people with the GEK shooting the engine of the tank to cause significant damage.
Rodger Forbes Doomheim 7	Posted - 2013.01.14 04:24:00 - [9] - Quote DJINN leukoplast wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Stop demanding that tanks get nerfed, this shouldn't be an infantry-only game. If you want that, you might as well go to Call of Duty. Well it shouldn't be a tanking-only game either. Seriously. HAVs and LAVs troll each match. Everytime I see an LAV there's one operator, changing seats and such. Do it again! Now say "cheese". :D
xprotoman23 Internal Error. Negative-Feedback 1452	Posted - 2013.01.14 05:06:00 - [10] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Stop demanding that tanks get nerfed, this shouldn't be an infantry-only game. If you want that, you might as well go to Call of Duty. *Part of this comment has been edited by a moderator because it is in breach of the rules of conduct of this community.* Care to explain yourself 3:30 10:00

NAV HIV The Generals 151	Posted - 2013.01.14 13:37:00 - [11] - Quote Logi Bro wrote: Where is this coming from? Small arms fire doesn't do **** to HAVs. Wrong bro... I lost a Madrugar to SMG in the last build. Could be the last shot. But to see a HAV taking damage from a SMG? FML
Kushmir Nadian Valor Coalition RISE of LEGION 78	Posted - 2013.01.14 14:25:00 - [12] - Quote Iron Wolf Saber wrote: It takes about a squad of 20 people with the GEK shooting the engine of the tank to TAKE ITS SHIELDS DOWN 10%. fixed.
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 580	Posted - 2013.01.14 19:22:00 - [13] - Quote Complaining that anything killed a Militia HAV is idiotic. I once destroyed a Sica by giving it a stern look.
crazy space 2100046106 ZionTCD Legacy Rising 879	Posted - 2013.01.14 22:52:00 - [14] - Quote NAV HIV wrote: Logi Bro wrote: Where is this coming from? Small arms fire doesn't do **** to HAVs. Wrong bro... I lost a Madrugar to SMG in the last build. Could be the last shot. But to see a HAV taking damage from a SMG? FML weak points
Polish Hammer Conspiratus Immortalis 300	Posted - 2013.01.14 22:55:00 - [15] - Quote I once sneezed in the general direction of a Sagaris and it went down without a hitch. HAVbuffplzkthx
Tzaar Bomba Doomheim 174	Posted - 2013.01.14 23:01:00 - [16] - Quote Lol GEK a tank killer? Lol only if its hit by swarms and forge and limping away.
Forlorn Destrier ZionTCD Legacy Rising 914	Posted - 2013.01.14 23:08:00 - [17] - Quote Tzaar Bomba wrote: Lol GEK a tank killer? Lol only if its hit by swarms and forge and limping away. I think that's his point - he doesn't think guns should do any damage - look at his comment about the SMG.
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 580	Posted - 2013.01.14 23:27:00 - [18] - Quote I think small arms have a 10% damage efficiency against vehicles before the effects of resistance modules. I think its reasonable that small arms do SOME damage to vehicles, even if its rarely enough to actually make a difference. As for finishing blows with an SMG...I dont know much about modern tanks, but I imagine if you unloaded into the engine of a tank that is on fire....it would cause some damage. But that's just me.
Spkr4theDead Namtar Elite Gallente Federation 22	Posted - 2013.01.14 23:48:00 - [19] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: I think small arms have a 10% damage efficiency against vehicles before the effects of resistance modules. I think its reasonable that small arms do SOME damage to vehicles, even if its rarely enough to actually make a difference. As for finishing blows with an SMG...I dont know much about modern tanks, but I imagine if you unloaded into the engine of a tank that is on fire....it would cause some damage. But that's just me. Are you talking about things like the British Challenger and American Abrams? They have explosive-reactive armor. They can take hits from RPGs and shrug them off. There aren't IEDs in Dust so we don't have to worry about those. Remote explosives require an active detonation; dunno if proxy explosives work against vehicles. But no, automatic weapons don't do anything to tanks. At all.
Spkr4theDead Namtar Elite Gallente Federation 22	Posted - 2013.01.14 23:49:00 - [20] - Quote xprotoman23 wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Stop demanding that tanks get nerfed, this shouldn't be an infantry-only game. If you want that, you might as well go to Call of Duty. *Part of this comment has been edited by a moderator because it is in breach of the rules of conduct of this community.* Care to explain yourself 3:30 10:00 You lag worse than the Japanese. Your opinions and argument are invalid. I can't wait to see if CCP reports on stuff like lag and latency for individual people. I'm sure they have the technology to do so.

Forlorn Destrier ZionTCD Legacy Rising 914	Posted - 2013.01.14 23:51:00 - [21] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: I think small arms have a 10% damage efficiency against vehicles before the effects of resistance modules. I think its reasonable that small arms do SOME damage to vehicles, even if its rarely enough to actually make a difference. As for finishing blows with an SMG...I dont know much about modern tanks, but I imagine if you unloaded into the engine of a tank that is on fire....it would cause some damage. But that's just me. Are you talking about things like the British Challenger and American Abrams? They have explosive-reactive armor. They can take hits from RPGs and shrug them off. There aren't IEDs in Dust so we don't have to worry about those. Remote explosives require an active detonation; dunno if proxy explosives work against vehicles. But no, automatic weapons don't do anything to tanks. At all. Video game. Argument over.
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 580	Posted - 2013.01.14 23:52:00 - [22] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: I think small arms have a 10% damage efficiency against vehicles before the effects of resistance modules. I think its reasonable that small arms do SOME damage to vehicles, even if its rarely enough to actually make a difference. As for finishing blows with an SMG...I dont know much about modern tanks, but I imagine if you unloaded into the engine of a tank that is on fire....it would cause some damage. But that's just me. Are you talking about things like the British Challenger and American Abrams? They have explosive-reactive armor. They can take hits from RPGs and shrug them off. There aren't IEDs in Dust so we don't have to worry about those. Remote explosives require an active detonation; dunno if proxy explosives work against vehicles. But no, automatic weapons don't do anything to tanks. At all. True but we're also talking about futuristic weapons as well. I mean the Gallente Assault Rifle shoots superheated plasma, not to mention depending on the tank, it has natural weaknesses against certain damage types, like the SMG will do more damage to armor than shields, and lasers will do more damage to shields than armor. We're all running around in Iron Man suits shooting laser beams, its kinda tough to make good comparisons to real life weapons and vehicles.
Scheneighnay McBob Bojo's School of the Trades 1058	Posted - 2013.01.14 23:59:00 - [23] - Quote It's bad enough that HMGs are a threat to LAVs (not just killing the driver)
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 580	Posted - 2013.01.15 00:02:00 - [24] - Quote Scheneighnay McBob wrote: It's bad enough that HMGs are a threat to LAVs (not just killing the driver) Highest DPS smallarms weapon the the game versus the weakest militia vehicle?


Pages: [1] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last 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.