|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Shotty GoBang
Pro Hic Immortalis
1035
   |
Posted - 2013.09.12 19:34:00 -
[1] - Quote
1) CCP reviews numerous requests to balance the automatic assault rifle.
2) CCP is assured by AR users that the weapon is perfectly fine as is.
3) CCP observes AR performance spikes across all combat metrics and engagement ranges.
4) CCP reports that they are closely monitoring the AR situation.
5) Rebalance is postponed, as to avoid irritating the competitive playerbase.
6) AR proliferation increases, as folks seek to survive and compete.
7) CCP observes increased AR adoption rates.
8) Rebalance is postponed, to avoid irritating an ever-growing playerbase. |
Shotty GoBang
Pro Hic Immortalis
1045
|
Posted - 2013.09.12 21:05:00 -
[2] - Quote
Ydubbs81 RND wrote:
you guys do realize that this is an fps?
If Dust were an FPS, a Shotgun would beat an Assault Rifle at 3 meters.
|
Shotty GoBang
Pro Hic Immortalis
1046
|
Posted - 2013.09.12 21:34:00 -
[3] - Quote
Iron Wolf Saber wrote:
Well that makes you a scrub
^ Sometimes I worry about you, IWS. |
Shotty GoBang
Pro Hic Immortalis
1057
|
Posted - 2013.09.12 23:13:00 -
[4] - Quote
mikegunnz wrote:PS.
If you think that dropping the ROF to 650 is overkill. You may be right. I'm always up for debate. After a little more thought, I'd say drop the ROF to 675. (an even 10% change) This would be a good starting point. CCP can always fine-tune from there.
Rebalance should be like flying plane.
Minor adjustments, applied incrementally. |
Shotty GoBang
Pro Hic Immortalis
1086
|
Posted - 2013.09.13 16:53:00 -
[5] - Quote
^ Scout ... they move so fast.
|
Shotty GoBang
Pro Hic Immortalis
1090
|
Posted - 2013.09.13 19:10:00 -
[6] - Quote
+1 for your research, analysis and presentation, Mr. Hurin.
There is fatal flaw, however in your approach and conclusion.
DPS on paper is substantially different from DPS in game.
Accuracy must be considered in any sound analysis.
DPS disparity (actual vs theoretical) is oft observed in CQC, where the AR is demonstrably dominant.
100% accuracy with a Shotgun is seldom -- if ever -- observed. The same goes for the HMG.
On paper, the SG and HMG should out-DPS the AR.
In game, however, the opposite is observed.
I hope this makes sense; let me know if I can clarify.
There is reasoning behind HMG heavies and Shotgunners opting to run the AR.
- Shotty GoBang |
Shotty GoBang
Pro Hic Immortalis
1090
|
Posted - 2013.09.13 19:22:00 -
[7] - Quote
Mary Sedillo wrote:
GoBang probably abused the difficulty to aim the AR properly to dominate those who tried using it with cheap tactics and he can't quite do it anymore. QQ MORE?
Hello. I don't believe we've met.
If by "cheap tactics" you mean sneaking into optimal shotgun range, often behind an opponent ...
Then yes, I am guilty as charged.
If by "QQ" you refer my expectation that a Shotgun should beat an AR in close quarters ...
Then yes, I am also guilty of this charge.
Not for lack of effort, but I fail to understand your point. Perhaps you can clarify?
Mary Sedillo wrote:
... Get over it. Adapt. Or go somewhere else.
On this point -- which is quite clear -- you likely need not worry.
Present imbalance held constant, I will absolutely take my leave. |
Shotty GoBang
Pro Hic Immortalis
1097
|
Posted - 2013.09.13 21:58:00 -
[8] - Quote
Mary Sedillo wrote:
Alright, let me take it slower with you.
Much obliged.
Mary Sedillo wrote:
You are presenting it as if the AR ALWAYS wins in CQC. I say it doesn't.
"Always" was neither stated nor implied.
An SG should beat an AR in CQC, far more often than not.
The SG and HMG serve zero purpose otherwise.
Mary Sedillo wrote:
You are probably mistaking mid-range or mid-close range for CQC.
I've used the weapon long enough to know it's limitations.
What I've not used is tanks, which is why you won't find me offering advice to tankers.
Mary Sedillo wrote:
That is good that you are leaving.
If and when I leave Dust is entirely up to CCP.
I've paid nearly $200 to Devs who have crippled Scouts.
Only a fool would pay more for an FPS that favors aim-assisted "EZ Mode" over gunplay and tactics.
Mary Sedillo wrote:
That means one less "Nerf X because I can't abuse Y anymore to beat X" thread.
Constructive criticism is what the Devs have requested.
I offer my time, money and feedback in hopes to see a game I believe in reach its potential.
Yet you'd have me leave. On grounds of divergent opinion. Interesting. |
Shotty GoBang
Pro Hic Immortalis
1105
|
Posted - 2013.09.14 14:00:00 -
[9] - Quote
Banning Hammer wrote:
You realize that is a damage fallout linked to the range, right ? People can hit you from long range, but the weapons hardly do any damage. I think what you "been" noticing is the aim-assist problems with kick and dispersion.
http://i.imgur.com/PyUmDEA.jpg
^ Courtesy of Cyrius Li-Moody |
Shotty GoBang
Pro Hic Immortalis
1107
|
Posted - 2013.09.14 14:44:00 -
[10] - Quote
Banning Hammer wrote:
Before 1.4 practically no one was complaining about the AR, after the 1.4 update all suddenly the AR is super OP... you don't find that curious ?
I suspect feedback/complaints spike in natural response to role-bleed. That is, when a given weapon excels in its role while outperforming other weapons in their respective roles. I would offer the following examples as means of illustration:
- Pre-Nerf Tac AR) A scoped, long-range weapon smashing in CQC.
- Pre-Nerf Flaylock) A "finisher" sidearm out-DPS-ing most primary weapons at substantial range.
- Chromosome Shotgun) A CQC weapon dealing substantial damage well into medium range.
I've been cautioned by respected brother against sounding like a weapon elitist, though I believe strongly that feedback/complaint threads are a necessary evil. These threads are a means by which we can keep Devs in the loop, such that things possibly missed by QA can be quickly brought to their attention.
- Shotty GoBang |
|
|
|
|
| |
|