and I use a cornucopia of weapons, that all perform similarly in terms of combat effectiveness - with there being a tool for every job - assault rifles for blitzing, TARs for defense and guerrilla tactics- Burst rifles for ambushes and defense when you have time to aim well - sniper rifles for sniping (duh) - Scrambler rifles for killing heavies - and HMG's for crowd control on hordes of players.

400rpm was ok

Stop complaining about the TAR nerf when lazer rifles still have it the worst

You want obsolete? Look at the laser and the MD. The TAR now gives you a long range option to a weapon class that's already too versatile for its own good. It's not supposed to be the best rifle, just another option.

Not complaning about the nerf, it was just taken too far. way to not read.

No. And the reasons are contained within your post.


You describe a cornucopia of weapons, and three of them you got from a single skill. What other weapon skills can make that claim (also, ARs only require light weapon operation 1)? Does a laser rifle user get a LR good for blitzing, defense/guerilla, and ambushes/defense? A mass driver user? A sniper rifle user?

ARs alone get that variety from a single skill. The TAR continues to have the highest range in the game aside from the Sniper rifle, so it still has an edge on practically every weapon in the game by virtue of being able to hit beyond their reach. Also:



It's at 400 RPM now. Just because you have a preconceived notion of how a "semi-auto" gun functions in the modern world does not mean that function needs to be carried over to the operation of a niche plasma blaster rifle in a futuristic setting. There are many reasonable explanations for why the rate of fire might be slower on a plasma blaster that has far higher damage and range than its full auto cousins.

The description of tactical rifles also describes them as "medium damage" and "single shot". For comparison, the Breach is described as "high damage" and "low rate of fire". If anything, in-game descriptions imply the RoF should possibly be lower, and the damage of those two guns swapped.

Would that make it less effective? Probably. However, you're still getting access to a mid-range precision weapon, burst rifle, and full auto gun for the price of a single skill.

The weapon type (Blasters) is the "short-range, high-damage" option in EVE. The fact that variants exist which belie this distinction is a credit to Gallente engineering perhaps, but different rifle types from other races are supposed to excel more in given roles. This makes sense as pulse lasers (for example) outrange blaster-tech by far in EVE, and you would expect tech based on that to be the superior long-range option.

As per CCP, the default rifle types per racial rifle are: assault (short) Gallente, burst (short-mid) Minmatar, breach Caldari, and tactical Amarr. The scrambler rifle is supposed to be the racial rifle that fits a default tactical role. The fact the Gallente have a variant that fits that role in a way is a benefit to your skilling into "short-range blasters" - a bonus. It shouldn't be better anymore than mass driver masters should have edge on snipers at long range.

Same thing

they should keep the dam the same but keep the reduced caped rate of fire.

A double nerf to firerate, and dam drasticly lowers DPS moreso then just one.

Obviously the reduced rate of fire stops the nonsense of modded controler advantage (and realisum) so that should stay.

bet you cried when they nerfed lasers

nope. i dont use them.

it was 400 before they nerfed it too. shows how much you pay attention to detail. If you want to jibe on about how blasters work, or about how superman flies faster. be my guest. I want game balance and options, if you want to sit on your computer chair with a rage hardon because somebody said something that rankled you, why dont you pose some counter points to the system rather than telling me some descriptions should be swapped?

The fact of the matter is that it fires so slowly now that unless you catch a person with the weakest gear, in an open field there is a 99.9 percent chance that they'll have the time to make it to cover. Am I saying the fire rate should have stayed exacly as it was? no. They could have cut it in half and i would have still been happy. the current state of the TARs is laughable in every aspect. and to staunchly defend obviously over reached changes like they made is absurd. change the damage? im fine with it? change the clip size? ok dosnt bother me. Dumb down the fire rate? fine -BUT dont make the gun so ineffective as to cripple it completely. The laser rifle is a good example, but at least the high tier versions are still good, better than good even. But now every single TAR is basically a placeholder until they think of something better to put in its place.

I want game balance and options,

dont make the gun so ineffective as to cripple it completely

Hi guys,

We've been monitoring the TAR since the change. So far it is still one of the most used weapons with one of the highest kill counts.

The fact of the matter is that it fires so slowly now that unless you catch a person with the weakest gear, in an open field there is a 99.9 percent chance that they'll have the time to make it to cover.

So while people are composing their longwinded flame replies, ill leave you with this. There are alot of things in this game that need a little doctoring. but by doctoring, i mean a check up, not checking in for check up and leaving with a staff infection

Now, don't get me wrong, The TARs that were recently nerfed needed to be balanced. But to Completely neuter a class of weapon and make the stockpiles that players have utterly pointless. I Use a plethora of weaponry in game, From assault rifles to sniper rifles, to smgs and shotguns, scramblers and so on - And had a refreshingly fun time deciding what worked for my playstyle, and what made me most combat effective. I understand reducing TARs in damage, I can even see taking away 25% of the clips size. But the capped rate of fire makes every TAR a waste of isk. It's simply a chore in masochism to attempt to fight any other worth while player 1 on 1 with a tactical assault rifles unless they're oblivious to your presence, or AFK.

Like I said earlier, TARs did need to be balanced to quell the massive overuse of a better than average weapon. but what you have done is like going to the barber, asking for him to trim the top, and coming home with full body electrolysis. You should have (in retrospect) either taken all TARs off the market, and away from players, and reimbursed them, so you could properly rework them. instead we're left with hundreds upon hundreds of assault rifle shaped digital placeholders.

Before people start rattling off things like "you suck so you cant use the new TARs" or "you rely on an op gun" - let me tell you, I have a 2.0+ kd, my win ratio aint to shabby either - and I use a cornucopia of weapons, that all perform similarly in terms of combat effectiveness - with there being a tool for every job - assault rifles for blitzing, TARs for defense and guerrilla tactics- Burst rifles for ambushes and defense when you have time to aim well - sniper rifles for sniping (duh) - Scrambler rifles for killing heavies - and HMG's for crowd control on hordes of players. I dont claim to be a Dust Guru, just an above average grunt. and taking the balancing issue one step to far has broken some of the wheels of my shopping cart

The recent changes to The TARs have been taken a couple of steps too far, and as everybody knows, all it takes is a few stat points in either direction on just about anything in a game like this to make it over or under powered. I understand doctoring the damage, the clip size, even the price. but to reduce the fire rate on a semi auto weapon, and still call it semi auto is absurd - self loading maybe, but not semi auto. being able to fire as fast as a person can pull the trigger is part of the allure of semi auto weapons, and is part of what makes such weapons so combat effective - If you're good enough to keep your aim on a person while fanning that trigger, more power to you. 90% of the people playing Dust right now could not hit the broad side of a heavy gas extraction facility while going crazy with a semi auto gun. I understand the risk of modded controllers making things lame. but thats why you set a REASONABLE fire rate. so that when the people with turbos fire, its only as fast as someone could physically pull the trigger on the controller, 400rpm was ok, 300 could work too. But the minute Fire rate on TARs right now, along with the other overzealous stat changes has essentially made an entire catalouge of weapons pointless to even be wasting space on the database.

I paid good money to ccp for the luxuries I enjoy on dust, and My heart skips every time whining masses of people with expensive equipment get shot up by an assault rifle that costs 17k and was used cleverly, versus the 200k worth of equipment that was squandered by a player who was not cautious enough to keep it. The Glu 5 was a bargain for the overall value of the weapon, true - but it had its short comings -small clip, high recoil - but with distinct advantages - good range, excellent hip fire - Can I admit that It did a little bit to much damage compared to the duvolle? yes. Can I admit that All TARs needed to be doctored to make this game run smoother? yes. But do I think That CCP went about correcting an oversight the right way? no, they did not. A semi stealth nerf of one of the most popular classes of weapon, hastily implemented, and horribly received by the community. Expect to nerf Scrambler rifles next when kids start complaining about being one shotted. and while you're at it, Force people out of their spawn. Its one thing to snipe, its another story when you sit half a km outside the battle boundaries, and never set foot on the battlefield.

Still love dust, Thank you CCP for creating it. Hope we can get everything smoothed out soon.

Thats the thing, its not a viable choice anymore. the range is the same as it always was. the cyclic rate is NOT as fast as I can pull a real trigger, like someone stated it was earlier, and they destroyed the upgrade gradient for the tactical rifles. no difference now but a couple of damage points. with more than quintuple the isk value. I dont think they should be as powerful as they were before the debuff, but they crippled them almost as bad as they did the low tier laser rifles.

I played a bit with the Tac today. The GLU in particular. It felt very good. The 18 round magazine weighs heavy on your mind, and forces you into much more fire control then just squeezing off rounds in the general direction. It still packed plenty of wallop and dropped people quickly.

Working as intended then?