|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Kazu Fujiwara
Rinas' Raiders
17
   |
Posted - 2013.12.16 02:30:00 -
[1] - Quote
Ulysses Knapse wrote:DeadlyAztec11 wrote:Breach is long range not close range. That's an unsubstantiated claim.
... what.
The Breach Assault Rifle is the Gallente's version of the Rail Rifle. Which is medium to long range. So yes, Breach is for longer ranges.
People ask me, "Why do you fight?" I reply. "Why do you not?"
Beta Warrior, Heavy User, Rinas' Heavy Support Dude
|
Kazu Fujiwara
Rinas' Raiders
17
|
Posted - 2013.12.16 02:47:00 -
[2] - Quote
Ulysses Knapse wrote:
Then why does the Assault Rail Rifle have equal range to (Breach) Rail Rifles of the same tier?
... because it's a rail rifle? You've effectively taking a sniper rifle and slapped a full auto mode on it, given it a bigger clip, and replaced the scope.
Ulysses Knapse wrote:
And why do Breach Rifles in general have low hipfire spread?
Low RoF = Low CoF bloom.
Ulysses Knapse wrote:
Also, what do you think "Breach" means?
To me? Breach means "Make a big-ass hole in something." Like a breaching charge.
Breach is high damage, low RoF, long range. The low CoF bloom is due to that low RoF.
As for your weapon - a single shot rifle designed for close range? wut. Why? Why is that a good idea?
I'm fine with giving the Gallente a weapon similar to the CR (which they already have in the Tactical AR), but you'd be better modeling it around something like Halo's DMR or Battlerifle - which would fit Minmatar more, and the Amarr already have in the form of the Scrambler Rifle.
People ask me, "Why do you fight?" I reply. "Why do you not?"
Beta Warrior, Heavy User, Rinas' Heavy Support Dude
|
Kazu Fujiwara
Rinas' Raiders
17
|
Posted - 2013.12.16 03:20:00 -
[3] - Quote
Ulysses Knapse wrote:
That's not a very good argument for the ranges being the same.
Furthermore, did you click that link? Breach GAR has the same range as Standard GAR.
Yes, because they're the same weapon? All you've done is trade RoF for Damage. It's meant to be used at ranges longer than the standard version, and because of the reduced kick and RoF, you can keep your shots on target better. If you want a LONG long range version, you use the Tactical. It's not supposed to be a sniper version, just something you use when you're in an open field or something similar. Increased damage per shot means more damage over range, and the reduced RoF means reduced kick, which means more shots on target.
Ulysses Knapse wrote:
Also a bad argument. Why does it have lower Rate of Fire, and why not increase recoil per shot to compensate?
Lower rate of fire is, again, to give it better usage at medium range. It's currently a moot point with how accurate the regular AR is, but if the RoF is lower then you can land more shots on target at medium range compared to a standard AR. You don't increase the recoil because you're sacrificing close range combat ability in lieu of better accuracy and damage over range.
Ulysses Knapse wrote:
You're an idiot. In combat terminology, breaching is the act of breaking through enemy defenses, like in a sting operation. Why would you need to have long range if you're breaching an enemy complex? Trick question, you don't. What you do need is the ability to neutralize enemies at close ranges.
Okay;
1: I didn't call you names. So don't start with that. It doesn't help your argument in the slightest, and makes you look like an ass.
2: I'm aware of the combat terminology. You asked me what I thought it was, and I hardly think the Devs will have been been thinking of what the word means in a military sense while designing it.
3: Enemy Complex does not always = Enemy defenses. Yes, the Breach AR can still be used in close ranges - not as well as the regular AR - but it trades that ability for extended ability at range. You dent someone in the face with a standard AR from 50 - 60m, they're going to go "Ow" and hide. You hit someone with a Breach version and you may very well put them down before they can react, then go into CQC with it. You won't be as effective as people with standard ARs, but that's why you have teammates - you support the outdoor push, they support the indoor push.
Ulysses Knapse wrote:
Why is it a bad idea? Also, not close range, close- to-medium range. Big difference there.
Because single shot close range weapons are silly unless it's a shotgun. I look at this, and I see no reason to take it over a standard AR, or even a tactical AR. If it were the Gallente version of a sniper rifle, used for medium to long range? Ok, sure. I could see it. Effectively a bolt action sniper rifle, but trading range for a charge and more damage. If that were the case, then yes I'd take it. But right now it's basically a shotgun. But without the spread. Or the damage. Or the ability to follow up.
People ask me, "Why do you fight?" I reply. "Why do you not?"
Beta Warrior, Heavy User, Rinas' Heavy Support Dude
|
Kazu Fujiwara
Rinas' Raiders
17
|
Posted - 2013.12.16 03:39:00 -
[4] - Quote
Ulysses Knapse wrote:Kazu Fujiwara wrote:*snip* Such trouble over the name of a variant... However, you admitted that CCP uses non-perfect terminology, therefore I don't need to follow CCP's standards. iWin? Kazu Fujiwara wrote:Because single shot close range weapons are silly unless it's a shotgun. I look at this, and I see no reason to take it over a standard AR, or even a tactical AR. If it were the Gallente version of a sniper rifle, used for medium to long range? Ok, sure. I could see it. Effectively a bolt action sniper rifle, but trading range for a charge and more damage. If that were the case, then yes I'd take it. But right now it's basically a shotgun. But without the spread. Or the damage. Or the ability to follow up. That's funny, I don't remember listing a damage, so how could you know what the damage is, exactly? Also, I think we're getting close to the end of this argument. You see no reason to take it over the standard Assault Rifle? How interesting, because I see no reason to take any other weapons in the game over the Racial ARs. So basically, one could say it's on the same level as the rest of the weapons in the game. Isn't that a good thing? 
I never use the Gallente AR these days, I use a Rail Rifle. But that's not the point, the point is that this weapons is attempting to fill a hole in the Gallente aresenal that doesn't exist. Turn it into a longer range weapon, and it might not seem like a useless addition.
Also, you never did put down the damage. However the shotgun's strength lies in it's ability to quickly follow up or react to close range targets. With this weapon, you would need to be the aggressor at all times, and never let your foes take advantage, which in close range is impossible. You will get surprised. You will get ambushed. You will need to react quickly. Having a single shot, non-spread weapon means reacting is incredibly difficult, alongside with having to figure out if you have to charge the weapon, and then how much, because if you miss, or hit with the wrong charge level? Pop goes you.
With a shotgun it's just "Oh ****, shoot it". Less time figuring out what you need to do with your weapon trying to kill someone, more time figuring out how you're going to not die.
People ask me, "Why do you fight?" I reply. "Why do you not?"
Beta Warrior, Heavy User, Rinas' Heavy Support Dude
|
|
|
| |
|