Let's Discuss Thunder!

[Thekillerpenguin 1,731]

Thunder's damage doesn't tapper off too much at range. It's at 60% of it's power after max range.

Not really. After the minimum damage range, it uses weak damage, which will taper it off relatively quickly. Thunder's still better for long range combat than Smoky, but it's no Shaft/Railgun.

[Loackie 269]

Not really. After the minimum damage range, it uses weak damage, which will taper it off relatively quickly. Thunder's still better for long range combat than Smoky, but it's no Shaft/Railgun.

It still works on Monte Carlo, luckily, and that's the only thing that should matter b/c people feel pro when they're good at that map lol

[pizzaslad 471]

Not really. After the minimum damage range, it uses weak damage, which will taper it off relatively quickly. Thunder's still better for long range combat than Smoky, but it's no Shaft/Railgun.

Weak damage is 60% of the normal dmg after 140m from what I've gathered. Correct me if I'm wrong

[NewbieCake 3,067]

Mammoth M3 was on Lieutenant General, Its not that bad.

Yeah, but still, Tanki talks about game "balance" and they offer M3 Mammoth at Field-Marshal?! They're just all talk and no do.

[NewbieCake 3,067]

Thunder is not a very versatile weapon. Capping flags with it is tricky, 'cus you can't really shoot at close range without self-damaging. Long range combat is out too, since the damage tails off dramatically at long range. I remember shooting at an M0 hornet in Monte Carlo, and it took me like 7 shots to kill it with M1 thunder.

Really then, this weapon only works at mid range, with no real leeway, unlike smoky and ricochet which can operate at close range with relative ease.

 

Why then, would anyone choose thunder? The simple answer is that the Damage Per Second at mid range is immense. I reckon it would only be surpassed by twins overall, (close range guns don't count, a clip has about a 10 second reload) and twins is a **** to handle. Thunder is the KING of mid-range DM. I used to be a railgunner, but at mid range, thunder tears railgun to pieces. It can even knock their shot off if you know what you're doing (which, for the record, I don't).

 

Overall, thunder is a beautiful gun. The damage is monstrous and the reload is meagre compared with rail. Keep your foes at arms length, and be prepared to take some self damage, and you'll find your enemies typing swear words and accusations of noobery into chat before 5 minutes.

 

What more could you want?

+++

[sackpilot 9]

Thunder's damage doesn't tapper off too much at range. It's at 60% of it's power after max range. And Sackpilot, there is no real way of telling if that Hornet was drugging or not can you?

Thunders damage - 40% is very weak, and I don't remember the exact number of shots but it was alot. I don't recall whether or not the hornet had thunder protection, so maybe that's why it took so long. Also it was inactive. That's how I landed so many shots on it, and I don't know why or how an inactive player would drug unless they were over a drop zone.

 

Either way, you know what I was trying to say, so maybe stop arguing over details. My point was simple, thunders damage decreases with distance, which is something nobody can argue against.

[M1-A2 840]

I know I cought a hacker the other day. Landed 8 Double Power Mu'ed M3 Thunder shots on him at almost point blank range. He had storm paint, no Double Armor, and a Viking M1 or 2. Don't remember which.

This was in arena, so I knew what supplies and stuff he had.

 

Btw I ranked! :D

http://prntscr.com/6pyof2

[Loackie 269]

Btw I ranked! :D

http://prntscr.com/6pyof2

lolygon but ok.

 

Gratz though :D

[M1-A2 840]

lolygon but ok.

 

Gratz though :D

If you're talking about that hacker guy, it was when I was parkouring in arena.

 

Thanks :)

[pizzaslad 471]

Thunders damage - 40% is very weak, and I don't remember the exact number of shots but it was alot. I don't recall whether or not the hornet had thunder protection, so maybe that's why it took so long. Also it was inactive. That's how I landed so many shots on it, and I don't know why or how an inactive player would drug unless they were over a drop zone.

 

Either way, you know what I was trying to say, so maybe stop arguing over details. My point was simple, thunders damage decreases with distance, which is something nobody can argue against.

60% damage (If I'm not wrong. Even if, 40% of 70 is still something, not much albeit but something)

 

Your first point was Thunder is an absolute terrible gun at range, which it's not (Like TPK said,it's no Rail or Shaft, but it's better then 6-7 other turrets) You also presented a few points, so I countered them. Got a problem? Well then don't post them. You have no real way of telling what that Hornet was doing. From my experiences, Thunder in Monte-Carlo is dangerous (3 hits to kill my Wasp from across the map) That doesn't sound weak to me, contradicting what you said about Thunder's range (I know Thunder's damage decreases with range if you haven't noticed)

[M1-A2 840]

60% damage (If I'm not wrong. Even if, 40% of 70 is still something, not much albeit but something)

 

Your first point was Thunder is an absolute terrible gun at range, which it's not (Like TPK said,it's no Rail or Shaft, but it's better then 6-7 other turrets) You also presented a few points, so I countered them. Got a problem? Well then don't post them. You have no real way of telling what that Hornet was doing. From my experiences, Thunder in Monte-Carlo is dangerous (3 hits to kill my Wasp from across the map) That doesn't sound weak to me, contradicting what you said about Thunder's range (I know Thunder's damage decreases with range if you haven't noticed)

Adding to that, with a DP, I can one-shot hornets and Wasps. M2 Mammoths die in about 3 shots. Powerful indeed. And don't get me started on splash damage...

[sackpilot 9]

60% damage (If I'm not wrong. Even if, 40% of 70 is still something, not much albeit but something)

 

Your first point was Thunder is an absolute terrible gun at range, which it's not (Like TPK said,it's no Rail or Shaft, but it's better then 6-7 other turrets) You also presented a few points, so I countered them. Got a problem? Well then don't post them. You have no real way of telling what that Hornet was doing. From my experiences, Thunder in Monte-Carlo is dangerous (3 hits to kill my Wasp from across the map) That doesn't sound weak to me, contradicting what you said about Thunder's range (I know Thunder's damage decreases with range if you haven't noticed)

First of all, I said minus 40% damage, which shows how much attention you pay to anything. Second, my point was that I never get many kills at long range with thunder and never get killed at long range at thunder. On long range maps I use rail, which can easily destroy thunder at long range. At least in my experience. All I wanted to do was post my own personal thoughts on thunder, but you are clearly spoiling for a fight, so there, you have one. What exactly you're trying to acomplish is beyond me.

 

You're a higher rank than me so maybe you encounter more M2 and M3 equipment. That's probably why our experience differs, becuase I have not lied to anyone here in what I have said. That is my experience. You haven't lived my life so stop arguing about things you don't have a clue about.

[tanker538N 394]

thunder? no problem for my dictator m2 wid cedar :3

[dragonssk1 334]

Highest Reward so far. With the courtesy of: Thunder

 

[pizzaslad 471]

First of all, I said minus 40% damage, which shows how much attention you pay to anything. Second, my point was that I never get many kills at long range with thunder and never get killed at long range at thunder. On long range maps I use rail, which can easily destroy thunder at long range. At least in my experience. All I wanted to do was post my own personal thoughts on thunder, but you are clearly spoiling for a fight, so there, you have one. What exactly you're trying to acomplish is beyond me.

 

You're a higher rank than me so maybe you encounter more M2 and M3 equipment. That's probably why our experience differs, becuase I have not lied to anyone here in what I have said. That is my experience. You haven't lived my life so stop arguing about things you don't have a clue about.

What I'm trying to do is tell you Thunder isn't horrible at range. I'm not picking a fight with anyone, just telling my story. You said you posted your personal experiences and thoughts, and so am I. Maybe you don't get many kills at range with Thunder, and that's you,but I surely do (of course Rail is better, but Thunder works alright)If you don't want any controverse on a forum, don't post on one (BTW in all my posts I said Thunder deals 60% damage after 140m. Never said 40) And yes, I know you haven't lied :)

[sudeeprauta 150]

The only reason i dont like thunder is its self damage otherwise thunder is the boss of all turrets.^_^

[LeIouch_Vi_Britannia 6,163]

The only reason i dont like thunder is its self damage otherwise thunder is the boss of all turrets. ^_^

Ever heard of Emerald? Even tho I dont have it yet and Im goig to buy it, some good games :)

My thuner was just M0 3-4 days ago so Im still a newb with it...

 

[I3rilliant 503]

I should be hopefully be getting M2 Thunder soon.

[sackpilot 9]

What I'm trying to do is tell you Thunder isn't horrible at range. I'm not picking a fight with anyone, just telling my story. You said you posted your personal experiences and thoughts, and so am I. Maybe you don't get many kills at range with Thunder, and that's you,but I surely do (of course Rail is better, but Thunder works alright)If you don't want any controverse on a forum, don't post on one (BTW in all my posts I said Thunder deals 60% damage after 140m. Never said 40) And yes, I know you haven't lied :)

 

 

Ok, maybe I misunderstood your tone. I thought you were just being awkward for the sake of it, but your point is fair enough. Maybe because you have M2 thunder and I only have M1. I don't have a problem with controversy, but for the record, I don't want to argue with you. Especially since you're a fellow thunderer :D

 

Sorry for getting abit uppity, I thought you were having a go.

[pizzaslad 471]

Ok, maybe I misunderstood your tone. I thought you were just being awkward for the sake of it, but your point is fair enough. Maybe because you have M2 thunder and I only have M1. I don't have a problem with controversy, but for the record, I don't want to argue with you. Especially since you're a fellow thunderer :D

 

Sorry for getting abit uppity, I thought you were having a go.

Haha it's okay :) A misunderstanding is a misunderstanding. I don't like agruments anyway. I just like giving a little tidbit of info here and there :P

[pizzaslad 471]

Thunder is my baby  :wub:  I can't wait for a sale to get it M3 :D Then M4  B)

[LeIouch_Vi_Britannia 6,163]

Thunder is my baby  :wub:  I can't wait for a sale to get it M3 :D Then M4  B)

I love it how I just suddenly shredded all my plans and bought it 0=>3 and then all went jelly xD

[Loackie 269]

Then M4  B)

m9 when I get M4 Hammer DUEL ME mkay. :3

[GurmitSingh 27]

Should I pair Thunder M3 with Viking M2 or Mammy M2? Say in Sandbox or Poly CP...

[M1-A2 840]

I find Viking to be very effective. Good speed and health.

I find mammy to be too slow. Sure it's a killer when you get to the point, but I've found that getting maximum points hinges on getting to the point fastest. That's something that you just can't do with mammoth. By the time you get to the point, your team will have capture it already.