DUST Search - Announcement:Weapon stats!

All Channels

General Discussions

Announcement:Weapon stats!

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

General Discussions

Announcement:Weapon stats!

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 6 post(s)
Fizzer94 L.O.T.I.S. Public Disorder. 562	Posted - 2013.10.25 06:47:00 - [1] - Quote Feedback: the font on those charts... The 6s look like 8s.
Fizzer94 L.O.T.I.S. Public Disorder. 562	Posted - 2013.10.25 07:01:00 - [2] - Quote It seems the DPS on the Rail Rifles is about the same at the DPS on Blaster Rifles. I was expecting it to be lower as a tradeoff for its range. Maybe the RRs will kick pretty hard? Or maybe they will have the worst hipfire?
Fizzer94 L.O.T.I.S. Public Disorder. 562	Posted - 2013.10.25 07:03:00 - [3] - Quote Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Fizzer94 wrote: Feedback: the font on those charts... The 6s look like 8s. Also, Combat Rifles look like they don't use much resources, even at prototype. Its minmatar. Minmatar weapons use a decent amount of CPU iirc.
Fizzer94 L.O.T.I.S. Public Disorder. 562	Posted - 2013.10.25 07:09:00 - [4] - Quote Cosgar wrote: Fizzer94 wrote: It seems the DPS on the Rail Rifles is about the same at the DPS on Blaster Rifles. I was expecting it to be lower as a tradeoff for its range. Maybe the RRs will kick pretty hard? Or maybe they will have the worst hipfire? Probably a lower RoF since the breach was its placeholder. Which brings up a question- what's the scope zoom going to be like on it? I know it has a lower ROF, but it dishes out damage just as fast as the AR. About 450 DPS at standard. This worries me. Here's hoping it has some sort of downside to make up for its range.
Fizzer94 L.O.T.I.S. Public Disorder. 562	Posted - 2013.10.25 07:26:00 - [5] - Quote OK. That combat rifle is easier to fit, has a higher DPS, larger magazine size and more range than the current AR. There is something wrong here.
Fizzer94 L.O.T.I.S. Public Disorder. 563	Posted - 2013.10.25 07:29:00 - [6] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: This is somewhat alarming, actually... The Assault Rail Rifle outperforms -EVERYTHING- else in terms of Damage and Range. I don't see any reason to continue using the Assault Rifle when it doesn't even do what it's supposed to anymore: High damage in close quarters combat. Comparable Level Assault Variant Rifles, in order from highest to lowest DPS: SL-4 Assault Rail Rifle: 458.6 GEK-38 Assault Rifle: 446.25 CRD-9 Assault Scrambler Rifle: 444.7 8K-42 Assault Combat Rifle: 440 Comparable level Assault Variant Rifles, in order from highest to lowest Optimal Range: SL-4 Assault Rail Rifle: 72 meters CRD-9 Assault Scrambler Rifle: 55 meters 8K-42 Assault Combat Rifle: 50 meters GEK-38 Assault Rifle: 44 meters Comparable level Assault Variant Rifles, in order from highest to lowest Effective Range: SL-4 Assault Rail Rifle: 94 meters CRD-9 Assault Scrambler Rifle: 83 meters 8K-42 Assault Combat Rifle: 77 meters GEK-38 Assault Rifle: 72 meters I know! I don't think CCP remembers that DPS needs to be sacrificed when you make a ranged weapon.
Fizzer94 L.O.T.I.S. Public Disorder. 566	Posted - 2013.10.25 07:54:00 - [7] - Quote TechMechMeds wrote: Fizzer94 wrote: Feedback: the font on those charts... The 6s look like 8s. Also, Combat Rifles look like they don't use much resources, even at prototype. Because they fire bullets rather than energy, laser or rail. I understand that. The SMG also fire bullets, but uses PG. Minmatar weapons use very little to no PG, but have a higher than average CPU usage. For targeting computers and such. The Combat rifle seems to use very little of either, for a comparable performance.
Fizzer94 L.O.T.I.S. Public Disorder. 567	Posted - 2013.10.25 08:04:00 - [8] - Quote TechMechMeds wrote: Fizzer94 wrote: TechMechMeds wrote: Fizzer94 wrote: Feedback: the font on those charts... The 6s look like 8s. Also, Combat Rifles look like they don't use much resources, even at prototype. Because they fire bullets rather than energy, laser or rail. I understand that. The SMG also fire bullets, but uses PG. Minmatar weapons use very little to no PG, but have a higher than average CPU usage. For targeting computers and such. The Combat rifle seems to use very little of either, for a comparable performance. Cool, just don't start QQing about it, let it be released first. We don't all our stuff because of too much QQ, balancing before release is ridiculous because its not even in use to properly be looked at. Ssshhhh lol I won't QQ about it. I'm sure there is something about it that makes up for its low fitting cost. I'll wait to see it in combat before I fully judge it.
Fizzer94 L.O.T.I.S. Public Disorder. 568	Posted - 2013.10.25 08:16:00 - [9] - Quote Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: Laurent Cazaderon wrote: Those numbers dont strike me as particularly odd. We should stay cautious regarding the DPS stats as we all know the guns behavior is a major factor in how effective a gun is. Also, we dont have the accuracy rating for those new rifles. And we all know how the DPS from the machine gun seems appealing at first.. So yeah. Wait and see. That may be so, but let's look at the rail rifle. It has a very long range on it. If it's particularly inaccurate, it's not going to effective at that range. If it's accurate enough to take advantage of that range, it outperforms most other weapons. My guess is that its hipfire isn't too great, or the aiming speed while ADS suffer greatly. A combination of both seems likely as well.
Fizzer94 L.O.T.I.S. Public Disorder. 647	Posted - 2013.10.28 16:46:00 - [10] - Quote I lol at all these guys crying about their easy mode swarms getting nerfed. Being the easiest AV weapon to use, they should also do the least damage. Balance. They lock on.They could do even less damage and still be balanced. [Insert snarky remark here.]

Fizzer94 L.O.T.I.S. Public Disorder. 648	Posted - 2013.10.28 23:10:00 - [11] - Quote Sgt Kirk wrote: Fizzer94 wrote: I lol at all these guys crying about their easy mode swarms getting nerfed. Being the easiest AV weapon to use, they should also do the least damage. Balance. They lock on.They could do even less damage and still be balanced. I never got why the swarm launchers did 2.3x more damage than the plasma cannon which takes skill to use while you could train a monkey to fire swarm launchers. Finally things are even, Stupid Caldari weapons. IKR! The swarm does more DPS than the FG and the Placon, even though it is much easier to use, and doesn't miss. I don't think CCP understands balancing for skill very well. [+ªa¦Ç+¦++-ö-Å94] Burner of faces.
Fizzer94 L.O.T.I.S. Public Disorder. 659	Posted - 2013.10.29 04:31:00 - [12] - Quote Templar 514 wrote: JP Acuna wrote: But I can't wait to see a Forgegun nerf. Why would you punish swarms so bad and leave that annoying thing alone? I mean, it's good against tanks, but too good against dropships. Plus, it can kill infantry!! Swarms cannot. But WHAT ABOUT FORGEGUNS??? why not reduce their range or at least make a drastic (i mean drastic) damage reduction over distance? the only useful and effective weapon that heavies currently have Just quoting the stupid part. I didn't realize Heavies couldn't use ARs. [+ªa¦Ç+¦++-ö-Å94] Burner of faces.
Fizzer94 L.O.T.I.S. Public Disorder. 659	Posted - 2013.10.29 04:49:00 - [13] - Quote Templar 514 wrote: Godin Thekiller wrote: That just means that the Heavy needs fixing, not to give it one single crutch and ruin everyone else's fun. My main issue with what that guy said was that he more-or-less desired for the Forge Gun to be nerfed into uselessness. I DO agree that heavies in general need fixing, but right now the biggest thing that makes them at least passable is the Forge Gun. Until I see anything regarding dropsuit rebalance, then I will continue to say "don't nerf Forge Gun, because then heavy=useless". I'm hoping that 1.7/1.8 brings a much needed update to dropsuits in general (would like more variety in heavies to shoot at, since I'm AmarrSuitsForLife), and especially to heavies and our incredibly hardcore scoutbros, but until then. Yeah. Forges don't need a lot of "nerfing", so much as "tweaking". Fizzer94 wrote: Just quoting the stupid part. I didn't realize Heavies couldn't use ARs. Just quoting the stupid part. I didn't think people thought AR+Heavy is a good idea. Hint: A medium frame anything will do that infinitely better. I also didn't think that people would be so daft as to believe I was speaking of all weapon classes, rather than the class-specific Heavy Weapons that no one but Heavies can carry. The Forge Gun shouldnt be OP, just because the heavy isn't that great. It is OP by the way, for being so easy to use, it shouldn't be able to kill both Vehicles and Dropshots so efficiently. It needs to lose the splash damage. [+ªa¦Ç+¦++-ö-Å94] Burner of faces.
Fizzer94 L.O.T.I.S. Public Disorder. 663	Posted - 2013.10.29 06:11:00 - [14] - Quote My reasoning behind FGs being OP is that they only sacrifice very little ease of use for very high versatility. IMO if a weapon can kill anything in the game, and OHK people, it should be exceedingly hard to use. I like to call this concept of making hard to use weapons better 'balancing for skill'. The FG flies in the face of balancing for skill. It has one of the longest ranges in the game, does the most damage, and has perfect accuracy, and isn't really that hard to use at all. The only downside of the FG is its charge and its limited Ammo supply, and the charge isn't even much of a downside because you can hold it. It outperforms the Plasma Cannon in almost every way, despite being easier to use. It has a higher DPS, doesn't have projectile drop(or slow speed), has a faster fire rate and can fire more rounds before it has to reload(which is only barely longer than the Placons reload I might add). Keep in mind that I don't want to nerf the FGs DPS. It needs it to be an effective AV weapon. What I want is for it to be much harder to use against infantry. In the same way the Placon is better at killing infantry than vehicles, I want the FG to be better at killing vehicles than infantry, by making it harder to use against infantry. [+ªa¦Ç+¦++-ö-Å94] Burner of faces.
Fizzer94 L.O.T.I.S. Public Disorder. 663	Posted - 2013.10.29 06:21:00 - [15] - Quote Zeylon Rho wrote: Just an observation: four days since this thread was made, and it already has more pages of posts than the vehicle thread. There are a lot more infantry than vehicle specialists. Also the swarm nerf is a huge deal I guess. [+ªa¦Ç+¦++-ö-Å94] Burner of faces.
Fizzer94 L.O.T.I.S. Public Disorder. 663	Posted - 2013.10.29 08:26:00 - [16] - Quote Magnus Amadeuss wrote: Easy fix to forge guns I either posted or read before on this forum. The reticule should not turn red when aimed at dropsuits. There, forge gun tower spammers and anti-infantry duties fixed. BTW this is coming from someone who uses forge guns ALOT. Oh and the heavy has bigger problems than the forge gun being the only viable weapon. Those problem should be addressed, not covered up. Do that and reduce splash diameter(or damage, reducing damage would make it an assist machine though) and the Forge Gun would be an actual skillshot weapon. [+ªa¦Ç+¦++-ö-Å94] Burner of faces.
Fizzer94 L.O.T.I.S. Public Disorder. 669	Posted - 2013.10.29 18:22:00 - [17] - Quote dogmanpig wrote: Krom Ganesh wrote: SHANN da MAN wrote: Blink speed is actually 0.004 seconds on average ... Average Blink Speed That link states 400 milliseconds... which is 0.4 seconds. quote for LOLs .1= tenths .01= hundredths .001= thousandths- that is one millisecond " about 300 to 400 milliseconds or 3/1000ths to 4/1000th" You owe me your first born daughter when she is 18. They will die from "nature causes" any time now with that kind of smarts. can't wait to see it on the news Lrn2maths. 1 millisecond is 1/1000 of a second. So, 400 milliseconds is 400/1000 of a second. 400/1000 ++ 100 = 4/10 4/10 = 0.4 So, 400 milliseconds = 0.4 seconds. You did horrible math, then demanded to ** his daughter. You sir are the worst kind of stupid. That was like 5th Grade Mathematics. GET OFF MY FORUMS! [+ªa¦Ç+¦++-ö-Å94]** Burner of faces.
Fizzer94 L.O.T.I.S. Public Disorder. 673	Posted - 2013.10.29 23:58:00 - [18] - Quote Johnny Guilt wrote: If explosive AV is getting nerfed atleast buff RE to stick to vehicles along with a damage up REs do plenty of damage. If you want vehicles to die as quickly as they do in BF, then vehicle should get coaxial blasters and be able to destroy cover and buildings. [+ªa¦Ç+¦++-ö-Å94] Burner of faces.
Fizzer94 L.O.T.I.S. Public Disorder. 721	Posted - 2013.11.02 07:07:00 - [19] - Quote dogmanpig wrote: Fizzer94 wrote: dogmanpig wrote: Krom Ganesh wrote: SHANN da MAN wrote: Blink speed is actually 0.004 seconds on average ... Average Blink Speed That link states 400 milliseconds... which is 0.4 seconds. quote for LOLs .1= tenths .01= hundredths .001= thousandths- that is one millisecond " about 300 to 400 milliseconds or 3/1000ths to 4/1000th" You owe me your first born daughter when she is 18. They will die from "nature causes" any time now with that kind of smarts. can't wait to see it on the news Lrn2maths. 1 millisecond is 1/1000 of a second. So, 400 milliseconds is 400/1000 of a second. 400/1000 ++ 100 = 4/10 4/10 = 0.4 So, 400 milliseconds = 0.4 seconds. You did horrible math, then demanded to ** his daughter. You sir are the worst kind of stupid. That was like 5th Grade Mathematics. GET OFF MY FORUMS! whats wrong with banging an 18year old? 400 millieconds is .4 4milliseconds is .004 there is nothing wrong with my math. i never said krom was wrong just that he owes me his firstborn which is still true. I said to get off my forums. Why are you still here? I also looked back at all the content in this thread, and both Krom Ganesh's and your posting history to see if any such agreement concerning his first born daughter was made. No such agreement was made. You simply demanded his daugher, with clear intentions of . I don't care if its a joke to you, I don't find funny. GTFO [+ªa¦Ç+¦++-ö-Å94]** Burner of faces. The Plasma Cannon is not underpowered.
Fizzer94 L.O.T.I.S. Public Disorder. 725	Posted - 2013.11.02 22:13:00 - [20] - Quote Evicer wrote: Godin Thekiller wrote: ChribbaX wrote: As someone who has recently found love in swarms... that lock nerf is a bit too much. The damage sure, will take a few more hits. But you can bet you will be wasted instantly trying to dodge a tank from 175m... and those dropships are now most of the time out of lock range. 175m is way outside of any blaster range (I use stabilized, so I know), and that's when rendering starts to ** up. Plus, before, you could keep dropships out of the battle from most objectives with the range they had. now, you can only do one. Still think 250m is better, but unless they make the rendering work so I can see you shooting at me, then 175 it is. Adapt or die lol........ we're not both infantry.WE are not doing the same DPS the tanker is shooting a Large turret. in your description one player is sitting in a vehicle....That has anywhere from 3k to 8k hp .The tanker has all the time in the world to acquire the target.Most wannabe tankers that are complaining are complaining about damage of av nades as well. These are people with no "awareness" at all, and now want all the time, optimal range,DPS stacked in there favor. lololololololol Actually a Duvolle does more DPS then a large blaster. lololololololol [+ªa¦Ç+¦++-ö-Å94]** Burner of faces. The Plasma Cannon is not underpowered.