It only seems logical and much easier for developers to balance, rather than making everything pretty close in DPS and adding extremities and weird nerfs that don't really nerf in weapon handling (charge time of rail rifle cough cough).

They really need to go back to basics right now, it's a clusterfuck.

Tiericide....

well sry for nor being part of the best .. -_-
also enouh about stats i mess around alot because i can get bored of dust quikely
i dont leave a match becuase of bad K/D or ovius lose
also why brig them in the frist place, did your really go in game and search me up, dont you have nothing better to do,
i think your hiding the fact you want an easy win.
also i bearly play i wish they had played houres

You are bringing the aggression and placing titles on people. Well have a taste of your medicine. You attack people and then get all over defensive about yourself. Walk out on this thread it can only get worse for you or else you will just continue to prove everyone else right.

Tiericide....

you secretly hate me for no reason, dont you?
i dident go full out on stats did i?
right now i feel your hiding something
Also stay on topic

Walk out on this thread it can only get worse

you secretly hate me for no reason, dont you?
i dident go full out on stats did i?
right now i feel your hiding something
Also stay on topic

You know I actually made a thread not to long ago, titled
The Last Talk on Tiercide or something like that.

I basically outlined a plan for CCP to keep tiers but basically make them irrelevant and that is a 2 pronged fork. Making PC viable and very open (meaning more people can play and more room to) while adding SP acceleration till a bench mark where it wears off. Basically you a rushed to proto gear and the normality should be proto gear. But afterwards SP becomes more grindy and slows down people from reaching the proficiency skills any faster.

The idea is to make Proto the norm but give people a chance to use downgraded gear for whatever reason (fitting costs and maybe ISK efficiency. I am much more ISK efficient in ADV suits). And pub matches would be for the noobs while PC is where everyone else is. PC should be so much incentive that running Proto in Pubs by comparison is severely diminished in rewards.

The spool up time is a joke if you just repeatedly tap R1 and as soon as you hold down R1 it will fire instantly giving it no spool up[ time whatsoever.

You put one bad idea into the forums and watch the natives go nuts repeating that bad idea. This is typical in this forum. The tank thread brought about the idea of removing the redline....which is very bad idea by short sighted folks. Let's not forget the AR, that needed a nerf but folks wanted to exclude the fact that there were a less amount of racial weapon variants available at the time, so of course majority of folks had ARs and of course it seemed too lethal when folks been popping its triggers for months on end.

Now its the RR. In which the pattern continues yet again. Over abundance is what drives this. An over abundance of death. An over abundance of its usage. Those two things push the idea that the RR must be nerfed somehow.

Also, people flocking to RR is nothing more than the option in COD that allows you to gain the same weapons as you recent killer. So folks get killed by RR, they run and get the RR. Which furthers pushes the idea to many who fall to it that somehow it needs to be nerfed since, more deaths has come from the RR and more people are learning how to use the rifle.

The question is, if it were the CR, would it happen the same way? More than likely, yes. The problem here is that the community, as stated many times before, don't think objectively when viewing the unique problems. They would have the charge time increased and if so, causes those FOTM users to switch over since its been changed. Then they would probably try the CR and then the CR will become famous. Then the community will cry for the nerf hammers for that as well, without thinking that, hey, plenty deaths and usage doesn't equate to it being nerfed.

The same thing happened with tanks. Tanks on the first day of the changes, were flooding the field. Instead of folks thinking that it will all pass because its the new toys, they cry "Tank 514!!!" from the top of their lungs because of the over abundance of usage and deaths. Tanks are nowhere near the same problem that it once was when the changes came. No one is talking about that though.

This is the never ending facepalming formula that I have experienced on these forums time and time again. It never stops and they never learn. The community, better yet the majority of the community, is hell bent on nerfing anything that kills them too much or is used too much. So essentially, they are wanting to nerf the users of those items. But you can't do that, so you just nerf the weapons that they use in attempt to find something that would give them even ground. Nevermind that skill has nothing to do with this. He killed me with that too many times, that's gotta be nerfed.

This is happened in COD, where dual wielding SMGs were strong and killed many. Same thing with Halo with the battle rifle.

I enjoy coming to the forums, but it boogles me sometimes how people view this game and view what needs to be nerfed or not. If the opinions were objective, then I wouldn't have much to say. But they aren't.

well sry for nor being part of the best .. -_-
also enouh about stats i mess around alot because i can get bored of dust quikely
i dont leave a match becuase of bad K/D or ovius lose
also why brig them in the frist place, did your really go in game and search me up, dont you have nothing better to do,
i think your hiding the fact you want an easy win.
also i bearly play i wish they had played houres

You put one bad idea into the forums and watch the natives go nuts repeating that bad idea. This is typical in this forum. The tank thread brought about the idea of removing the redline....which is very bad idea by short sighted folks. Let's not forget the AR, that needed a nerf but folks wanted to exclude the fact that there were a less amount of racial weapon variants available at the time, so of course majority of folks had ARs and of course it seemed too lethal when folks been popping its triggers for months on end.

Now its the RR. In which the pattern continues yet again. Over abundance is what drives this. An over abundance of death. An over abundance of its usage. Those two things push the idea that the RR must be nerfed somehow.

Also, people flocking to RR is nothing more than the option in COD that allows you to gain the same weapons as you recent killer. So folks get killed by RR, they run and get the RR. Which furthers pushes the idea to many who fall to it that somehow it needs to be nerfed since, more deaths has come from the RR and more people are learning how to use the rifle.

The question is, if it were the CR, would it happen the same way? More than likely, yes. The problem here is that the community, as stated many times before, don't think objectively when viewing the unique problems. They would have the charge time increased and if so, causes those FOTM users to switch over since its been changed. Then they would probably try the CR and then the CR will become famous. Then the community will cry for the nerf hammers for that as well, without thinking that, hey, plenty deaths and usage doesn't equate to it being nerfed.

The same thing happened with tanks. Tanks on the first day of the changes, were flooding the field. Instead of folks thinking that it will all pass because its the new toys, they cry "Tank 514!!!" from the top of their lungs because of the over abundance of usage and deaths. Tanks are nowhere near the same problem that it once was when the changes came. No one is talking about that though.

This is the never ending facepalming formula that I have experienced on these forums time and time again. It never stops and they never learn. The community, better yet the majority of the community, is hell bent on nerfing anything that kills them too much or is used too much. So essentially, they are wanting to nerf the users of those items. But you can't do that, so you just nerf the weapons that they use in attempt to find something that would give them even ground. Nevermind that skill has nothing to do with this. He killed me with that too many times, that's gotta be nerfed.

This is happened in COD, where dual wielding SMGs were strong and killed many. Same thing with Halo with the battle rifle.

I enjoy coming to the forums, but it boogles me sometimes how people view this game and view what needs to be nerfed or not. If the opinions were objective, then I wouldn't have much to say. But they aren't.

Doesn't RR have Dmg bonus to armour and the AR has a Dmg bonus to shields?

Otherwise good writeup :)

AR
Damage profile: -10% shields, +10% armor

RR
Damage profile: +10% shields, -10% armor


The shields/armor advantages and disadvantages cancel each other out since neither has a bigger bonus or disadvantage to their respective strong point (shield or armor) than the other.

what your saying is inteligence is OP,
well great .....

You complain about the irrational need to nerf whatever is getting the kills, yet you are being irrational by dismissing the numbers and my analysis based on your own feelings. My argument wasn't "there are too many RRs killing me!", my argument was "if it has more range, it should have less DPS and less close range effectiveness to compensate". You are the one not being objective here.

It's obvious my post is saying that I'm tired of hearing these RR nerf necessity threads. I understand what you're saying, I'm not a brain dead mercenary here. Your bandwagon thread lead me to create that long post.

Second, the RR is just fine the way it is. Just what is supposed to do in close range? Spray confetti at you with clown horns to boot?

DPS? It's a freakin rail rifle with rail technology!! Of course the DPS is going to be pretty big!!!

Smh

Mayby becuase you havent relised as you never used the 'OP' RR but having an increased optimal reange means at close range it Does Less Damage try briging a RR at close range agaist a AR, your sure to lose

It's obvious my post is saying that I'm tired of hearing these RR nerf necessity threads. I understand what you're saying, I'm not a brain dead mercenary here. Your bandwagon thread lead me to create that long post.

Second, the RR is just fine the way it is. Just what is supposed to do in close range? Spray confetti at you with clown horns to boot?

DPS? It's a freakin rail rifle with rail technology!! Of course the DPS is going to be pretty big!!!

Smh

And just what are Lasers and MD users suppose to do when they're being beaten in all ranges by the RR?

You are being unreasonable, and placing your understanding of lore before balance. You are also wrong about the lore, yes rail tech is supposed to be high damage and high range, but lore does not necessitate that it comes with a high enough rate of fire to match the DPS of close range weapons. Sniper rifle for example is rail tech; has high damage, high range, but its ROF leads it to have low DPS.

Consider these options (X remains constant):
A) X number DPS
B) X number DPS, +30% more range.

No one in their right mind would pick option A. Right now the AR is option A, and the RR is option B. Ideally no weapon should be clearly better than another, each should have their own strengths and weaknesses, regardless of lore.

LOL but in another thread, you would state that the weapon must be bound to the lore!!!! C'mon man, are you for real? It sounds like alot of you guys need to toughen up a bit