We constantly whine about the lack of content and we want new weapons... but some people are actually saying that the Tac AR is too different from the Scrambler rifle to be a "mimic weapon"...

Wow, we have 2 different weapons and we do whine about it?

Scrambler rifle and Tac AR are my favorite weapons in the game, so I'm really frustrated when I hear people want to change one or both of them.

"So why does the Tac AR have better range than the weapon that is supposed to mimic?"

"To mimic" doesn't mean "to be a weaker version of". It just means that that particular weapon variant is meant to share some basic characteristics with the original weapon to allow a similar use on the battlefield.

You can't make a weapon "a weaker version of" another one, although this destroys the whole concept of weapon balance (and overall balance) in a game.

Weapon variants are more ISK and SP expensive and this is their downside. This kind of limitation is good design. To make a weapon weaker because it's "a copy" is bad design.

I enjoy both weapons for different reasons.

When people say that the Scrambler has less range then the Tac AR, they forget to say that the Scrambler has great hipfire accuracy, higher ROF, higher DPS, larger clip size, no recoil and Charge ability (and of course an overheating mechanic that prevent this weapon from being the most OP gun ever made).

They are different weapons.

I wouldn't mind a slight range buff for the scrambler at all, to be honest (of course I wouldn't, I use the weapon...), but what really bugs me is people who whine about the only actual advantage of the Tac AR over the Scrambler. If you want a better range for the Scrambler, well, fine! But reducing the Tac AR's range is not.

Also, the Tac AR has an actual scope. I expect some decent range with a scope. What's the purpose of having a damn scope if I can't hit from 60 meters away?
The scope is not always an advantage, as it does limit your sight. You can't control multiple targets at the same time effectively and it does limit your ability to switch to another target quickly.
The "reflex" sights of the Scrambler are much better for medium-close combat (not really for CQC, but the hipfire accuracy and the high ROF make the Scrambler pretty deadly in CQC as well), this has advantages as well.

All these characteristics let me assume they are completely different weapons and if CCP wanted the Tac AR to be a "Plasma Scrambler", they should have made it with the same sights and the same characteristics. And to be honest, that would be horrible.
If this is what CCP wanted to do, they made everything wrong and they should change the 2 weapons completely. But some players really love the 2 weapons as they are... (I have a huge picture of the Tac AR on the wall next to my bed).

What about a Scrambler with an actual scope and massive range (and maybe slightly less damage output) as answer to the Tac AR and what about a semi auto AR with Reflex sights, less range and higher ROF as answer to the Scrambler?

This is an idea. Nerfing the Tac AR's range because it's better than the Scrambler's is not a good idea, especially since the Scrambler has such great advantages over the Tac AR.

I think these new weapons variants really need to be added.

If it's necessary because the Tac AR is that different from the other rifles (I don't think so), split the AR Skill tree and make the Tac AR a unique weapon (rename if you want), but for the love of God, don't break this weapon.
There are other people in the Tac AR fan club other than me. Not many, probably, but we are part of the community and we don't want our weapon to be changed because "it has better range than another weapon".
No one is even saying it's OP (CCP unleashed the nerf hammer already), especially when the standard AR is so much better, no one is even saying it's unbalanced, all this QQ just because you compare it to the Scrambler?

No way!

And this is all... I guess.

What you don't understand and you really should is laser tech out ranges blaster tech every time, all the time.

What you don't understand and you really should is laser tech out ranges blaster tech every time, all the time.

What you don't understand and you really should is laser tech out ranges blaster tech every time, all the time.

"The idea being that each race will have it's base variant be Assault, (Gallente) Burst (Minmatar), Breach (Caldari) or Tactical (Amarr) and then the variants are a specific race's take on the others using their own tech. So, you'd get an Assault Rail Rifle that attempts to somewhat mimic the behavior of the Gallente Assault Rifle and a Tactical Assault Rifle that attempts to mimic the Amarr Scrambler Rifle and so on."
https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=870299#post870299 from CCP Remnant.

Confirms the tactical AR is basically a Gallente scrambler rifle.

Now consider this:
Scramblers are lasers. Lasers have the 2nd highest range, 2nd to only railguns.
ARs are blasters (including the tactical AR). Blasters are the lowest range weapons.

Given all this info, you would expect the scrambler rifle to have longer range than the tac AR, but somehow its the opposite. This is why its a problem.

I don't want the tac AR to be inferior though. I want it to get a damage increase (blasters are suppose to have high damage per second), or get a bigger magazine (like 4 more rounds).

"So why does the Tac AR have better range than the weapon that is supposed to mimic?"

You can't make a weapon "a weaker version of" another one, although this destroys the whole concept of weapon balance (and overall balance) in a game.

When people say that the Scrambler has less range then the Tac AR, they forget to say that the Scrambler has great hipfire accuracy, higher ROF, higher DPS, larger clip size, no recoil and Charge ability (and of course an overheating mechanic that prevent this weapon from being the most OP gun ever made).

I wouldn't mind a slight range buff for the scrambler at all, to be honest (of course I wouldn't, I use the weapon...), but what really bugs me is people who whine about the only actual advantage of the Tac AR over the Scrambler. If you want a better range for the Scrambler, well, fine! But reducing the Tac AR's range is not.

Also, the Tac AR has an actual scope. I expect some decent range with a scope. What's the purpose of having a damn scope if I can't hit from 60 meters away?

The "reflex" sights of the Scrambler are much better for medium-close combat (not really for CQC, but the hipfire accuracy and the high ROF make the Scrambler pretty deadly in CQC as well), this has advantages as well.

Understand that laser tech is supposed to be the one with longer range.

Leaving this FACT apart. I like the place where the 2 weapons stand. At 80 mts the tac is annoying me an at 60 its killing m pretty effectivley.
But if i get 50mts range, you are going to get a charged shot and you are going down....

TAC
Advantages:
RAnge
good damage
Cheaper to skill into than Scrb

Disadvantages:
Sight is for mid/long combat only
Proto TAC is More expensive than Scramb proto
Lower Rof than S.Rifle

SCRB:
ADv:
Charged shot
Good rate of fire
Reflex sight is great for mid eengagements

Disadv:
Higher cost to skill into
Insane CPU/PG Drain
Overheat mechanic

---

Meh. The tac is very powerful and has incredible range. But i can 1 shot (charged) Med suits with my 4 Prof + 2 cx damage mods so i'll keep my Amarr weapon....

I'm fine with a range nerf on the TAR, because as already mentioned, it's the lowest range tech knock-off of one of highest range tech types in the game. It's also a knock-off THE prototypical tactical rifle in the game, that being the scrambler.

As for, "You can't make a weapon "a weaker version of" another one", yes you can. Every weapon is made to fit a certain role in the game, and this is largely in fitting with tech/damage type and the weapon's roles within the game.

The idea is about having certain weapons that you skill into fill specific niches. You don't skill into shotguns and expect their to be a long-range version that takes out snipers, for example. That's not the shotgun's niche. The rifles have been given a bit more leeway in this matter, and it would seem the idea is to give people that skill into those weapons a certain degree of flexibility while still stressing the differences in technology types.

Blaster tech is meant to be the shortest-range high-dps option in the game. This means the Duvolle AR is meant to be one of the fastest damage-dealers in short-range available in the game. The Duvolle should definitely outclass the Assault Scrambler in short range, as blaster-tech is supposed to be definitively better. That's one element of "balance".

This is why it's an issue to have the TAR outrange the Scrambler, as if a single weapon type (blaster AR) can be both the best in short-range and have an advantage at long-range over the tactical weapon type, you've effectively hosed the advantage for skilling into one over the other.

I'd say swapping the ranges is a good solution, and if you say that's too much of a nerf - you've basically admitted that the scrambler was at a disadvantage.

As to the scope issue, that's sort of a separate "design flaw" element they introduced. And you find all the AR models in the viewer are seemingly tactical anyway. It seems it's a holdover from how they were originally designing the weapon.

It's possible other elements of both the assault variants and tactical variants need to be further balanced (clip-size, damage, heat production), but having the blaster outrange the Scrambler is asinine. Bear in mind, there'll be two more tactical rifles (Combat and Rail), both of which will outrange the TAR in theory as well (and the rail will outrange the Scrambler in theory). The Plasma AR's edge as a "skill" will be the fact that in its short optimal range, the standard Assault-type rifle should still be the fastest damage dealer.

Supposedly they'll be seeking our input on rifle ranges with the new combat/rail coming out soon by posting their potential stats. So, you can stop the QQ and provide input directly at that point. They're likely to ignore this topic considering that.

we have the scrambler rifle vs assault rifle.. not going to say any more because i dont want to listen to any annoying rants..



but what of the laser rifle?

how should the laser rifle fit into this area as it out ranges the tac ar...

i think?

There are several points I disagree with:

1. No, you can't make a "weaker" and a "stronger" weapon, this is totally game-breaking, this is how "underpowered" and "overpowered" take place in a game and this is a bad mechanic! The Tac AR currently have its range as only advantage over the Scrambler, so if you cut its range (which is ridiculous, since a range nerf for a scoped weapon is so wrong...) or buff the Scrambler's range, you have to give it something else to balance it.

2. Once again, swapping the ranges would be too much of a nerf not because the Tac AR is at an advantage, but because it's the only advantage it has. Also, I repeat, it's a scoped weapon... it doesn't make any sense to nerf its range...

3. According to CCP Wolfman, the Rail rifle is the opposite of a Tactical Rifle: It's breach.

4. If you take the weapon as it is, without comparing it to other guns, I'm sure you can say it's fine. It doesn't feel broken, not UP, not OP, it's ok. Why do we have to change a weapon if it's in a good place..? Just because "the Scrambler is laser"? The Scrambler is a good weapon as well, I'd say it's "better" when you really specialize into it, thanks to the superior DPS and Charge mechanic.

As for the rest, I'm waiting to see the new rifles stats, we can't discuss about them if they aren't out yet.

1. Is an Ishukone Forge Gun Stronger than a MLT Forge gun? Is it game-breaking that that is the case? The fact that it has a scope is an incidental design issue, as I mentioned. It doesn't dictate the future of the weapon, it suggests that it should have a dot-sight instead. The advantage with Blaster Rifles is supposed to lie with the Assault Rifle itself. That's the advantage. Just as the Combat Rifle should be a better Burst Rifle than the Blaster Burst Rifle, and the Rail Rifle should be a better Breach Rifle.

2. The scope is non-issue of design. It just means it needs a different sight, as I mentioned. The advantage with ARs should be within the Assault variant.

3. Not sure what you're saying here. The Combat Rifle is Burst as well? The point is that the Combat and Rail Rifle will both have tactical variants, just like the AR. They're both longer-range tech than the Blaster, so they'll both need to have longer range than the TAR as well. That's what the tech types mean: they impact the range of the weapons and the damage types. The TAR will be the shortest range tactical rifle in the game.

4. The end point is to have all racial rifles fill their niche with variants that are advantageous for flexibility, but not greater than the competition. The endpoint does involve comparing all the weapons, and having ranges worked out appropriately. We need to change the weapons so that there's meaningful differences between specializing in the various rifle types, so the tech differences are observed, and the weapons are effectively balanced to be strongest in their given niche.

For Scrambler Users, this means they'll face-off against Tactical Rail Rifles that have better reach than they do. For Blaster users, this means they'll have the shortest range Tactical rifle, but should outdamage any of the other assault rifles in a short-range scenario. That's the balance.

Using a weapon variant that takes your rifle and tech-type out its niche means playing at a slight disadvantage (like running with a handicap) as a trade-off for the flexibility. For a Scrambler user, this should likely mean that your Assault Scrambler will have problems going toe-toe with a Duvolle user in the 20-30m range. For a Blaster user, this means even using a higher range variant like the TAR will require you to close the distance a bit to use your weapon against rifle users with tactical variants of superior range.

This isn't to suggest that everything is balanced and a simple range-swap fixes everything. The fire-rate or other things might need to be adjusted to account for range differences and so on. Tactical variants of some other guns are low-damage high RoF for example, so it's possible the TAR could go a completely different direction and get balanced.

Reasonable fix: Edited by Fizzer

TAC: +2 bullets per clip
+2 dmg
-10% range
LESS DISPERSION FIRE, just an bit more dispersion than the ScR.

S.Rifle: Range increase to be 10% further than Tac AR.
-3 dmg
LESS DISPERSION FIRE, as tight as a Laser Rifle's dispersion.

L. Rifle 10% range increase
-1 dmg




Anyone?

Why are lying ?
I se this lying ALL over the forum when players talk about the AR's.
The only reason i can se for doing this, must be ( oh no i got killed and i dont like that so i better make a post on my enemys weapon so i can get it nerfed) OMG
STOP talking about things you dont know anything about.

AR's have the higher cost to skill into, the AR's still have the sharpshooter skill and it cost almost a mill. More SP to skill into then the SCR or laser or any other weapon in the game does, exept the SMG...

Just STOP it. OMG