It is fair, kinda like how the AR is only good at like 45- m? Differences in effective range are a part of the game, and long range weapons should be difficult to use at close range, just as short range weapons should be difficult to use at long range.

I posted some suggestions earlier in the thread to tweak the RR making it less viable at close range, do you feel those changes were unreasonable?

user skill will never be even. if u can get all headshots with the SCR congratulations, you will do well with any weapon. Aim is king in shooter, no one will ever debate this. but when the weapon design is bad and everyone can use it against how it was intended it may be time for tuning.

the RR simply cant be designed as a close quarters weapon or it has no weaknesses. it and weapons like the SCR should have bat hipfire. the GEK & HMG should have good hipfire and faster ADS as they both gets outranged by weapons like the CR, SCR and RR. The CR should be the most balanced with solid ADS and and solid hipfire..though not as good as the SMG, HMG or gallente AR.

Actually lower tracking is exactly how railguns are balance in EVE. They have high damage but low tracking which makes them difficult to use against enemies up close with a high traversal velocity, but easy to use at long range where traversal is low. Blasters on the other hang have extremely high tracking, very high damage, but stupidly short range.

My proposed lower tracking on the RR would only apply to ADS, this is because I also proposed significant recoil for the RR when fired from the hip. The decreased tracking would discouraged people from using ADS in close quarters to avoid that increased recoil, but would not negatively affect long range combat since traversal velocity is slow at range.

I think no weaknesses is a poor way to put it. I think the inherent weaknesses the RR has a close range are not prominent enough, making it more effective in CQC than was originally intended.

Since I'm a prominent user of the RR I'll chime in here. The only time my RR has any success in close range is when someone boxes themselves in and they can't get away. That being said, when I'm up against someone that can stick and move like they should then I have serious difficulty in the close range and lose. The biggest issue I find with people is that they run away from the RR like they would an AR. The problem is that you are giving an RR what they want. Instead, find cover immediately even if you are 60m away from the RR. People stay in the open and try to fight it out against an RR. There is no other weapon before 1.7 that required you to find cover at 60+ meters away. So everyone has this bad habbit of just moving left to right. FIND COVER.

ur whining right now bro. RR is basically the Tac AR right now if it has great hipfire. Best hipfire should be the gallente weapons......I agree with the guys who recommended slower ADS. Since this is EVE the racial differences have to matter.

good point, that goes back 2 my point about player skill, where anticipation plays a big role. although I would say the charge up time should be increased a bit just like the CR ROF probably needs to come down.

NAV I think you're misunderstanding me.

I think Plasma Rifle should be used ADS which is why it needs to have fast tracking when ADS since it is supposed to be used in CQC where traversal is high. The RR SHOULD be difficult to use in CQC, even when ADS because that's how rails are balanced to be ineffective in close quarters.

The increase to hipfire recoil in RR would be to prevent less skilled players from taking advantage of the very stable RR and hipfiring with pinpoint accuracy. Unfortunately you can't reduce tracking from the hip as it would hinder simple movement.

If you're fighting around the optimal range of the RR, tracking isn't an issue. I use it quite frequently and would not suffer at all from reduced tracking if fighting at the appropriate range.

Negative. If that were the case there would no point in using any other rifle.

Basically how they do it in EVE is optimal range is a calculated value that incorporates how far the gun can shoot before it starts losing damage, accuracy, and tracking speed. Long range weapons suffer from poor tracking, which means they can't rotate fast enough to hit stuff up close, but their damage reaches out very far.

This gives turrets a sort of doughnut of optimal range, too close and the turret misses, too far and the damage falls off significantly.

How is it any different? Its two units with a weapon, moving and shooting at each other.

Anyways did some quick calcs in my head for your scout scenario.

At 80m and a Scout sprinting a 9m/s (which I think its actually faster than top speed) sprinting at a 90 degree angle from you, you would need a rotation speed of about 6.5 degrees a second to track him. At that speed it would take a little under a minute to do a full 360 rotation while aiming down the sight.....obviously this is insanely slow and I would never suggest it to be anything near that slow.

At 30m under the same conditions, you would need a rotation speed of 17 degrees a second, or about 21 seconds to rotate 360 degrees. Again, also rather slow.

I'll admit I have not done the calcs to see what the actual ADS turn rate is, but I can assure you it is not nearly as slow as these calculations require. In addition, this is a scout SPRINGING tangential to your line of sight. If he is morning normally, or moving at all away or closer to you, the needed rotation speed drops drastically.