so does the assault rifle in real life.

90% of gamers prefer assault rifle gameplay. Nerfing it because 90% of gamers prefer vanilla play isn't a justification, it's being an idiot.

if 90% of players use ARs, then it stands to reason that 90% of the kills will come from assault rifles.

How exactly are AR's OP? I'm a heavy, so I never use em really. But going against them a lot, I don't really see it. I would say maybe just knock the effective range down a bit (probably excluding the TAR); they seem to shred me just a little bit too quickly at some crazy ranges.

Play caldari logi is how to have fun?

Cripes! Why didn't you tell me I'm not having fun playing the most obnoxious fatty in DUST history???

How was I to know my HMG was less optimally fun? Does my forge gun suffer this deficiency?

You bring anecdotal evidence, and no hard facts. nothing is OP because you assert that it is OP.

Something is OP if numbers and facts prove it.

All I see here is that "the assault rifle beats everything." <---This would be an example of anecdotal evidence.

All nerf threads on the DUST forums save for a few who bring math to the party are anecdotal, and thusly worthless from a game balance standpoint.

"in the hands of skilled players it proved to be as effective as primary weapons"

Heres my maths....

The FleyLock could kill any suit other than a heavy (stupid cal logi) in 3 shots. Think thats quite simple.

Heres my maths....

The FleyLock could kill any suit other than a heavy (stupid cal logi) in 3 shots. Think thats quite simple.

As for the link, its an example... the AK47 could pretty much be fired underwater after being burried in sand. This is a whole other universe, quoting real life and that type of stuf for a GAME is pointless.

If you think the FleyLock was balanced... you might as well ask for HMG with 34dmg... wait...

According to your statement the MD need to be nerfed as well as this weapon is heavily overused in PC and most believe that this is the place to look for balance.

Apart from that I get barely killed by ARs in pubs not more than from sniper rifles, MDs and HMG. Even the SR gets a comeback...

The AR is used that much becasue there is a (well not onlyy one) BPO and its in the Starter fits so its logically that someone specs into that weapon. And with the slow skill progress most will stick with thier initial choice quite some time, especially when this choice feels familiar.

Remove the AR from starter fits and or give more weapon BPOs and than you will see more variety.

The AR is not OP in fact the AScR is much better rigt from the start. The damage falloff of the AR is much harcher than the fallof of the AScR. The only advantage the AR has over the AScR it benefits from two skills wheras the AScR gets nothing from skills. And to get there you have to spent 1.5 mil SP...

The only thing that is needed is the correct dmage and range profile (short Range and High DPS) and maybe a rename so not everyone will stick with the assault rifle.

My ideal Plasma Rifle (or Blaster Rifle) would look something like this:
opt Range up to 30m
eff. Range up to 45m
Damge 50
RoF 580 to 600
Clip Size 40 to 45

That would give the AR its niche and would differentiate it from the AScR...

I'm a troll. and completely ignore all the numbers D legendary uses to prove his points and logic and just write bullshit on his threads because I'm a troll

application on paper and application in practice are two different things.

My heavy fits, sentinel or otherwise do not die in 3 seconds to AR or anything else. On one gloriously memorable occasion I made a dipwad waste an entire mass driver drum on me (freedom mass driver). People who have shot at me and tried to splash me with forges don't live long.

1v1 generally they do not die. period.

You have lots of on-paper math which fails scrutiny in game. Just because ARs are violating YOU does not mean the rest of us are similarly challenged.

since CCP has denied your request to give heavies 30% resistance you're moving on to demanding nerfs on the weapons that actually kill heavies?

the assault rifle is the bread and butter weapon. many people use and are familiar with them, and know how to employ them. Similarly I know people who find similar utility in the scrambler and asscram rifles.

Further I have learned that presenting evidence contrary to your assertions is pointless because you don't even acknowledge it, much less evaluate it.

Every time this little cadre speaks (quit using alt accounts to like yourself and echo chamber your posts) sanity shrivels a little.

I dunno why I even bother. Every one of D Legendary Hero's posts somehow wraps back to "Heavies are UP and in need of serious buffs."

Fixing armor tanking fixes heavies. period.

further, when the caldari and minmatar heavies are released you can rejoice and enjoy the OP fatsuits you have always dreamed of (all hail shield tanks). Amarr heavies are armor tankers. go figure. There couldn't POSSIBLY be an imbalance there... NOPE!

but, every time I say fixing armor tanking fixes heavies... It's like his brain shuts off and he doesn't read, nor acknowledge the statement.

Allow me to spell this out in Crayon:

Heavies are not underpowered. they are suffering because armor tanking is imbalanced versus shields. When Armor tanking is as balanced as shield tanking, heavies will be fixed, and the Assault Rifle and Mass Driver will be less of hurt points for contentious butthurt.

Yeah lol, its an example of how tech can be used to explain away things like jamming
I used the AK referance because due to design and as youve stated material selection, issues can be overcome.

You quoted RL with how LMG were modded AR's and WW2 and stuff. My assersions make as much sense as yours if you want to keep any resemblace of balance in a game

If weapons worked how you want then HMG would do the same dmg as snipers now, AR would have sniper accuracy, Snipers would be like FG's, FG would be like orbitals, and orbitals would nuke the battlefield.

And FleyLocks were still OP.

application on paper and application in practice are two different things.

My heavy fits, sentinel or otherwise do not die in 3 seconds to AR or anything else. On one gloriously memorable occasion I made a dipwad waste an entire mass driver drum on me (freedom mass driver). People who have shot at me and tried to splash me with forges don't live long.

1v1 generally they do not die. period.

A proto heavy can kill a dropsuit in half a second to 1 second, the Boundless HMG has a DPS of 759, proto HMG, while the Proto AR has a DPS of 467.5,

the only way a medium dropsuit is able to kill a heavy is if the heavy has terrible accuracy, is not shooting at the medium, or if the medium is strafing all over the place. The reason the Militia AR is so "good" is because the Assault rifle doesn't have a huge spike in damage, or DPS, like most other weapons when going from basic to proto, for example the basic HMG has a DPS of 600 while the proto HMG has a DPS of 759, thats a 26% difference in DPS compared to the Assault rifles 425 DPS at militia and 467.5 DPS at prototype which is only a 10% difference in DPS.

So unless you suck as a heavy, or your using a basic HMG you have a fairly good chance of killing a medium dropsuit unless you get ganked, or they are strafing all over the place.

Only ARs with scopes are the TAC and the Burst, TAC is semi auto like the scram and their recoil was increased, Burst ARs are just a joke, lower damage than the standard and due to the way it fires it has a lower ROF as well
As for the standard itself at range its called pulsing your shots IE being a skilled FPS gamer, if you try full auto squeeze at distance you wont hit jack **** without having to make constant minor adjustments which guess what is something a skilled FPS gamer can do

I literally couldn't have said this better myself.

As for an earlier post talking about how missiles, bombs and the black death killed more people than AR's, wtf are you smoking? Sure that's entirely accurate in and of itself, but when you apply it to ground combat you become an idiot. Of course weapons of mass destruction are destructive on a massive scale (the clue is in the name). Assault rifles or rifles are, and always will be the main ground troop's weapon of choice.

As for very close CQC with AR's, we usually use breaching tools like shotguns or short barrelled versions of the same weapons that make up the bulk of the armed forces. Bullpup weapons are often employed in CQC because the gun packs all the power of a full sized AR but also has the same barrel length whilst retaining a shorter overall weapon length.

Are all the AR threads end up segueing about if the AScR or AR is OP, and then turn into a flame war?
Heres my thoughts from page one on the subject.

HOLY CRAP HE GETS IT!!!!

Also make armor tanking as viable as shields.

I would generally use the AR IF CCP FIXES THE CONTROLS!!

Yes, getting killed by the duvolle assault rifle in my very cheap standard heavy suit, very annoying. Nerf the AR please... Trololol

There was a spreadsheet that explained that AR damage does equal damage to shields and armor making it the weapon of choice to down someone.

Anything else that is kinetic like a grenade or Mass Driver deals less damage vs shields but a bit more against armor.
Same goes with Scram and Laser rifles which tend to affect shield but weaker vs armor.

AR's are annoying when you're killed by one fairly quickly but that's the nature of the beast of that kind of weapon.

And just relax about AR's killing you so fast - just relax and enjoy playing the game. It's not like you plunked down extreme monetary investment into this now did you?

Nerfing the AR is not the answer.

Getting the last two combat rifles into circulation is.

of all the weapons that NEED balance, the AR is at the bottom of that list.....

The LR was a horribly effective, vastly over powered weapon. It rained destruction from afar in mere seconds (2 max) in the hands of a skilled operator that learned how to maximize its accelerated range damage; Aim at something else before moving the beam onto the target. That ever increasing damage over time was the OP and generated a legion of LR users that sat safely back and beam destruction on Heavies.

Now that the LR is properly restricted those same users are QQ Kittens here on the forums attempting to reduce the AR such that their precious LR will rule once again. Assault Rifles are, and will be even in the future, the standard issue mid-range weapon. Tactical, burst and assault variant of all weapons are standard for DUST and CCP.

Distance is now back in the hands of snipers, major damage belongs to forge gunners, QCQ is the HMG (which I don't totally agree with) and the Evil that was the Flaylock has been nullified back to what it should have been, an alternative Small Weapon.

Recall that SP is very dear down in the DUST and most will not spec into both. Many AR wielders may eventually try the other weapons but to skill heavily into several commits precious SP Irrevocably to a path.

Laser rifles are the amarr equivalent of the sniper rifle.

Kinda like the scrambler rifle is the amarr equivalent of the Assault rifle.

Noticing a pattern here?

Oh wait, you mean all of the weapons will have racial variants?

OH NO! CHOICES! I CAN'T CHOOSE!

I would like to see this experiment: 2 players both decent at shooting, 2 amarr STD medium suits, not fitted (because they have the same shield and armor), 1 with std AR and 1 with std MD, shoulder to shoulder, 10 meters distance, count 5 seconds, turn around and start the duel.
Of course the 2 players must be new characters, to be sure they are not advantaged by their skills.

Not exactly.

CCP has explicitly stated various things about the rifle lines (Scrambler, Plasma, Rail, Combat), and how they're supposed to compare to each other.. vaguely equating to each other, but with variants that copy the other guns (Tactical, Assault, Breach, and Burst).

Similar comments were made for pistols, and how there's a racial variant for each (Ion, Flaylock, Scrambler, etc.).

The same can't be said of the other weapons. There are clear "racial" connections with weapons like the SMG, Mass Driver, Sniper, and so on, but they can't be said to have direct equivalents.

It's possible the "Precision Rifle" of the Minmatar is made to be an alternate form of Sniper rifle, but the function of the Laser Rifle doesn't quite add up range-wise or otherwise to be the same as a Sniper rifle. The Shotgun and Mass Driver also don't have what I'd call any direct analogs.

a militia AR has the potential to kill a heavy in less than 3 seconds. that is utter bs

[quote=D legendary hero]
1) HMG's are getting a buff in 1.4 or perhaps you didn't see that. (-5% dispersion per level of operations) Which should increase their usefulness and prevalence on the battlefield. Sounds like CCP is trying to increase all the weapon's usability to me.

2) When did the SMG become the only usable sidearm? The scrambler pistol is still amazing (if you can aim). Heck even if you can't get headshots your still doing beastly damage. Plus the flaylock, even in its nerfed state is no slouch, it is a great back up weapon and finishes off people who are already in armor nicely.

3) By saying the only good weapon for infantry is AR you are showing your ignorance once again. Scrambler weapons and laser weapons are great and just require a bit of thought as to their use. The mass drivers is extremely viable and can easily take on suits in most situations, and the shotgun (with the help of the new hit detection mechanics) might even be up to snuff again. That sounds to me like quite a few choices for aggressive players even if you remain unconvinced about the shotgun.

4) The Forge is the swarm launcher's best friend. Together they can take down a vehicle regardless of tank type quickly. The forge will blast off the shielding and the swarms will take down the armor. This sounds like a match made in heaven not a one or the other kind of exclusion. Also, please don't forget that the swarms still can't kill infantry (in anything but the most extreme instances) while forges are great at holding down a point in the absence of a sniper.