DUST Search - Do blaster turrets have too much range?

All Channels

General Discussions

Do blaster turrets have too much range?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Iron Wolf Saber BetaMax. 2867	Posted - 2013.02.23 14:37:00 - [1] - Quote Well yesterday I was trying to set up an AV ambush up for a tank on live harvest on the hill near B. The target takes a back road near A normally is on 4 points and snipes me with the blaster. Lore wise the reasons it has such a short range is that it detonates a shell inside a magnetic bubble before popping the bubble in the direction of the shot. Thus even shorter range than the plasma weapons which bubble wrap the plasma shot before sending the whole bubble down range. My forge gun did not have the reach to hit him either (though I am sure training sharpshooter to 4 would have fixed it) I was under the impression blaster tanks where supposed to be short range high damage and anti-infantry turrets, not have ranges that rival railgun/missile turrets. Your thoughts? As for those of you thinking I am crying OP, please note I have been balancing mods since 1998 for strategy games, I am just trying to find the more preferable spot for the blaster allowing future turrets like the auto-cannon, artillery, pulse and beam lasers to fit . Also I constantly expressed range concerns of the forge gun to the devs stressing the range reduction be just enough to justify the need to have sharpshooter trained. Because that range nerf 2x ago was just redicious with forge gun ranges shorter than ARs
Kesi Raae Kaae Much Crying Old Experts 40	Posted - 2013.02.23 14:40:00 - [2] - Quote They should have some noticeable damage falloff, more so than they have now. And Missiles are shorter range than Blasters in the current build
Bendtner92 Imperfects Negative-Feedback 369	Posted - 2013.02.23 14:41:00 - [3] - Quote He was probably using the Blaster turret with more range than the others (can't remember it's name). Are you sure you couldn't hit him with the Forge Gun? I highly doubt the Blaster has more range than the Forge Gun. Overall I don't really have that much of a problem with their range. They need to have some range and not be a total CQC turret.
4447 ZionTCD Legacy Rising 649	Posted - 2013.02.23 14:43:00 - [4] - Quote Their firing ach is stupid.
slap26 Pink Fluffy Bounty Hunterz RISE of LEGION 462	Posted - 2013.02.23 14:59:00 - [5] - Quote forge has a base of 300m range....
Mavado V Noriega SyNergy Gaming 2283	Posted - 2013.02.23 15:02:00 - [6] - Quote slap26 wrote: forge has a base of 300m range.... this. stop trying to nerf tanks more Blasters have a severe dmg dropoff at range and the "ranged" stabilized Blaster has very high PG requirements to even fit and does LESS dmg than the other blaster variants so its fine how it is
Sgt Kirk ZionTCD Legacy Rising 350	Posted - 2013.02.23 15:06:00 - [7] - Quote Mavado V Noriega wrote: slap26 wrote: forge has a base of 300m range.... this. stop trying to nerf tanks more Blasters have a severe dmg dropoff at range and the "ranged" stabilized Blaster has very high PG requirements to even fit and does LESS dmg than the other blaster variants so its fine how it is Seriously This^ If I wanted a nerf for everything that has annoyingly killed me LAVs would explode on contact with dropsuits. Your death =/= Nerf
Spkr4theDead Namtar Elite Gallente Federation 22	Posted - 2013.02.23 15:29:00 - [8] - Quote Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Well yesterday I was trying to set up an AV ambush up for a tank on live harvest on the hill near B. The target takes a back road near A normally is on 4 points and snipes me with the blaster. Lore wise the reasons it has such a short range is that it detonates a shell inside a magnetic bubble before popping the bubble in the direction of the shot. Thus even shorter range than the plasma weapons which bubble wrap the plasma shot before sending the whole bubble down range. My forge gun did not have the reach to hit him either (though I am sure training sharpshooter to 4 would have fixed it) I was under the impression blaster tanks where supposed to be short range high damage and anti-infantry turrets, not have ranges that rival railgun/missile turrets. Your thoughts? Another one crying for a nerf. Why don't you go back to Call of Duty? This game has TANKS, along with foot soldiers.
Iron Wolf Saber BetaMax. 2867	Posted - 2013.02.23 15:34:00 - [9] - Quote Sgt Kirk wrote: Mavado V Noriega wrote: slap26 wrote: forge has a base of 300m range.... this. stop trying to nerf tanks more Blasters have a severe dmg dropoff at range and the "ranged" stabilized Blaster has very high PG requirements to even fit and does LESS dmg than the other blaster variants so its fine how it is Seriously This^ If I wanted a nerf for everything that has annoyingly killed me LAVs would explode on contact with dropsuits. Your death =/= Nerf Actually I am not looking for a nerf I am looking for a possible bug, because there been other blasters I outlasted in the same fit in than what this thing took my head off at. Ill have to get a measuring stick or something but the distance he blew me up at was far enough his tank only took up 1/4 of the forge guns reticule usually the very same distance most railgun tanks nail me at.
slap26 Pink Fluffy Bounty Hunterz RISE of LEGION 462	Posted - 2013.02.23 15:36:00 - [10] - Quote Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Sgt Kirk wrote: Mavado V Noriega wrote: slap26 wrote: forge has a base of 300m range.... this. stop trying to nerf tanks more Blasters have a severe dmg dropoff at range and the "ranged" stabilized Blaster has very high PG requirements to even fit and does LESS dmg than the other blaster variants so its fine how it is Seriously This^ If I wanted a nerf for everything that has annoyingly killed me LAVs would explode on contact with dropsuits. Your death =/= Nerf Actually I am not looking for a nerf I am looking for a possible bug, because there been other blasters I outlasted in the same fit in than what this thing took my head off at. Ill have to get a measuring stick or something but the distance he blew me up at was far enough his tank only took up 1/4 of the forge guns reticule usually the very same distance most railgun tanks nail me at. Do you remember what type of blaster it was???

Iron Wolf Saber BetaMax. 2867	Posted - 2013.02.23 16:02:00 - [11] - Quote slap26 wrote: Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Sgt Kirk wrote: Mavado V Noriega wrote: slap26 wrote: forge has a base of 300m range.... this. stop trying to nerf tanks more Blasters have a severe dmg dropoff at range and the "ranged" stabilized Blaster has very high PG requirements to even fit and does LESS dmg than the other blaster variants so its fine how it is Seriously This^ If I wanted a nerf for everything that has annoyingly killed me LAVs would explode on contact with dropsuits. Your death =/= Nerf Actually I am not looking for a nerf I am looking for a possible bug, because there been other blasters I outlasted in the same fit in than what this thing took my head off at. Ill have to get a measuring stick or something but the distance he blew me up at was far enough his tank only took up 1/4 of the forge guns reticule usually the very same distance most railgun tanks nail me at. Do you remember what type of blaster it was??? That would have helped if I could remember, I do know my forge gun shot was short because the shell was mid air detonation, I got no readout, and reticule was not red however that has been another bug that I am able to hit targets beyond red reticules.
Iron Wolf Saber BetaMax. 2867	Posted - 2013.02.23 16:13:00 - [12] - Quote I am willing to chock the my short end of the shot on a light pole I found in the area though. That would explain why it seemed to detonate midair.
Bruce3 Wayne3 Seraphim Auxiliaries CRONOS. 10	Posted - 2013.02.23 16:16:00 - [13] - Quote Well I know that the higher quality turrets have better range, the forge guns with sharpshooter level have outrange any blaster turret.
Illuminaughty-696 Omega Risk Control Services 203	Posted - 2013.02.23 17:12:00 - [14] - Quote Not a nerf thread. This was actually a constructive attempt to ask a question. A problem as big as the so called nerfers are trolls who can't even discuss the game without crying about nerfers being everywhere. This is a beta. If everything was perfectly fine the way it is we'd already be testing the final build. Good post OP. Blasters used to be WAY too short ranged. You'd be in a tank or on a turret trying to shoot people 50 to 100 meters away wondering where you bullets went after 100 meters (I'm convinced they phase into another dimension and rain death and destruction down upon that dimensions inhabitants). There are two different kinds of blasters now, too. One is bigger/longer range (a heavy blaster or some such).
Scheneighnay McBob Bojo's School of the Trades 1058	Posted - 2013.02.23 17:15:00 - [15] - Quote I think it's perfect right now. You'll notice the difference when maps get bigger; perhaps at that point, missiles and railguns will need more range.
Iron Wolf Saber BetaMax. 2867	Posted - 2013.02.23 17:22:00 - [16] - Quote Scheneighnay McBob wrote: I think it's perfect right now. You'll notice the difference when maps get bigger; perhaps at that point, missiles and railguns will need more range. Well as it stands now missiles seem utterly useless, a blaster or rail tank plows though a missile tank and point blank ranges and the advantage of not overheating is not enough. This would probably be not so entirely bad if blaster shots have travel effects that where not so invisible. Either way been trying to measure out the distance but no targets with the sniper scope get near there I would have to estimate its around 250-275 meters.
Illuminaughty-696 Omega Risk Control Services 203	Posted - 2013.02.23 17:27:00 - [17] - Quote Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Well as it stands now missiles seem utterly useless, a blaster or rail tank plows though a missile tank and point blank ranges and the advantage of not overheating is not enough. They are entirely useless right now. They do scare newbs right up until they realize missile launchers fire popcorn at you, not munitions. Missiles were nerfed because they needed to brought down a notch. CCP brought them down ten notches instead. Blasters are therefore super prevalent and seem annoying because everyone with half a brain uses them,. because missiles are worthless - railguns are viable, but very specific in their functionality.
Tony Bonez Nova Tech Marines Hephaestus Forge Alliance 0	Posted - 2013.02.23 18:41:00 - [18] - Quote Hmm, this sounds exactly like a fight I ran into, and I know I was playing quite a few of you betas yesterday. If it's the situation that I'm thinking of your shot did indeed hit a light pole that was in front of me, confused the hell out of me for a second.
Iron Wolf Saber BetaMax. 2867	Posted - 2013.02.23 18:48:00 - [19] - Quote Tony Bonez wrote: Hmm, this sounds exactly like a fight I ran into, and I know I was playing quite a few of you betas yesterday. If it's the situation that I'm thinking of your shot did indeed hit a light pole that was in front of me, confused the hell out of me for a second. It might have been my client doesn't like drawing buildings, sometimes. None the less that range is quite far.
Lavirac JR DUST University Ivy League 129	Posted - 2013.02.23 18:49:00 - [20] - Quote They are the hardest turret to fit on a vehicle, leave em alone please...

Iron Wolf Saber BetaMax. 2867	Posted - 2013.02.23 18:52:00 - [21] - Quote Lavirac JR wrote: They are the hardest turret to fit on a vehicle, leave em alone please... Look I am just trying to figure out the max range of blasters and then decide if its too far out or not. Because if it is so I don't want rail-guns to get left behind on the matter either.
Tony Bonez Nova Tech Marines Hephaestus Forge Alliance 0	Posted - 2013.02.23 19:11:00 - [22] - Quote Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Lavirac JR wrote: They are the hardest turret to fit on a vehicle, leave em alone please... Look I am just trying to figure out the max range of blasters and then decide if its too far out or not. Because if it is so I don't want rail-guns to get left behind on the matter either. I switched back to blaster after using the railgun for a long time on my tank and i have found minimal difference in the range of the two on the current maps, but i would say that is partially because the maps at the moment are smaller. I think once we get bigger maps railguns will become much more efficient weapons. I will say though that unless utilizing the blasters that give you farther range at the expense of damage, there is pretty much a cliff that you hit in regards to range. Swarms can lock on well past this range, and forge guns/railgun tanks can shoot past it. However, with the current map layouts it's difficult to put a blaster tank in this type of situation and keep them in that no hit range
Iron Wolf Saber BetaMax. 2867	Posted - 2013.02.23 19:45:00 - [23] - Quote While true the range of these maps are pretty massive as it is, battlefield is the really only comparable map sizes for our team size shooting.
Thumb Green Kang Lo Directorate Gallente Federation 21	Posted - 2013.02.23 19:52:00 - [24] - Quote The maximum affective range of the M256 120mm smoothbore gun on the Abrams is around 3,000m, if I recall correctly. And by your estimation, I think 250-275m is more than fair given that blaster turrets are rapid fire and that these are tanks in a game set more than 20,000 years into the future.
Kesi Raae Kaae Much Crying Old Experts 40	Posted - 2013.02.23 19:58:00 - [25] - Quote Thumb Green wrote: The maximum affective range of the M256 120mm smoothbore gun on the Abrams is around 3,000m, if I recall correctly. And by your estimation, I think 250-275m is more than fair given that blaster turrets are rapid fire and that these are tanks in a game set more than 20,000 years into the future. I don't think how tanks and guns behave in real life should have any bearing whatsoever on DUST 514 balancing.
Thumb Green Kang Lo Directorate Gallente Federation 21	Posted - 2013.02.23 20:12:00 - [26] - Quote True, but what I'm saying is it's nowhere near what you'd expect from a real tank gun therefor I believe it to be fair.
Ten-Sidhe Osmon Surveillance Caldari State 414	Posted - 2013.02.23 20:14:00 - [27] - Quote Projectile from 120mm smooth bore is more like a rail gun projectile. Blaster is closer to rotary cannon like gau-8 on A-10. This should have no effect on game balance though. Range of m-1 is 2.5-8km depending on version and ammo, 8km range is with Israeli barrel launched missile not in U.S. service. From the max/optimal range thread, 249max range on longest large blaster 300m on forge. Forge does full damage at max and blaster starts losing damage just over 100m. That I can think of no mod/skill raises blaster range. So, the range is fine on blasters. If it did out range a forge then some glitch let it hit beyond max range. The no red reticule makes it sound like the blaster was past 300m still doing decent damage when it should have been out of range.
Thumb Green Kang Lo Directorate Gallente Federation 21	Posted - 2013.02.23 20:20:00 - [28] - Quote That's why I said "given that blaster turrets are rapid fire and that these are tanks in a game set more than 20,000 years into the future."
Iron Wolf Saber BetaMax. 2867	Posted - 2013.02.23 20:51:00 - [29] - Quote Thumb Green wrote: That's why I said "given that blaster turrets are rapid fire and that these are tanks in a game set more than 20,000 years into the future." 55,000 years actually, however we only been out of dark ages for... 400 years?
Baal Omniscient L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising 248	Posted - 2013.02.24 11:56:00 - [30] - Quote Thumb Green wrote: True, but what I'm saying is it's nowhere near what you'd expect from a real tank gun therefor I believe it to be fair. The point is that "fair" or "realistic" doesn't always mean "balanced for a video game". "Balanced" is far more important than "realistic" or "fair" when you are trying to make a video game that works decently well for all of the people who play it. Are blasters balanced? I honestly do not know. In my personal opinion there should be much more damage drop off since a blaster turret is THE anti-infantry weapon. It has lots of splash and fires quite far, so I think after a round reaches 65% of it's total range it's damage should start to drop off sharply as it moves towards it's maximum range. As it stands right now the rounds don't seem to lose damage until they reach around 80% max range, but I suppose I could be wrong on the exact count there. I'll test this out today. But anyway that's my opinion, which doesn't count for much.



Pages: [1] 2 :: 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.