I have no got damn reason why you people are complaining about to AR... Just because there's a weapon that can out range the AR? I swear...

I can out gun a rr user on my altar with gek from the AR option range.... You know how? BY STRAFING

I have no got damn reason why you people are complaining about to AR... Just because there's a weapon that can out range the AR? I swear...

I can out gun a rr user on my altar with gek from the AR option range.... You know how? BY STRAFING

Glad to see someone got the brains and the toughness to find ways to succeed. I respect that sir, honestly.

o7

This guy HAS to be a troll...

Most people dont even know the definition of trolling.

Also +1 to OP. It's ridiculous how people actually defend the RR, it's just like when people defended the Duvolle tactical back when it was OP. Remember how they said it was balanced back then, they brought all the false logic they could to defend their crutch, then it got nerfed.

Here's a good tip to know if a weapon is OP. If Nyain San or ancient exiles use it 90% of the time, it probably is.

Glad to see someone got the brains and the toughness to find ways to succeed. I respect that sir, honestly.

o7

I did cover the spool up time, I said it wasn't enough to really make a difference. The massive range advantage still more than makes up for it.

In cqc the spool up time of the RR is meaningless when soooooo many squads are running around with scanners. When a RR user knows someone is about to come around the corner they prefire the gun so they are shooting the red one he shows his face, thus minimizing the effect of the spool up time.

While this is not necessarily the RRs fault, the current meta gameplay which focuses heavily on scanners has allowed the long range RR to become very powerful in cqc.

And just what am I supposed to do when a MD and Laser got sights on me? Please man. I was here on manus peak getting my dropsuit burned to a crisp when I first started. I didn't call for lasers getting nerfed. When MDs were tearing up the place, I didn't complain then.

So I suggest you do what I did, fight your hardest to not get in the sights and fight those users. It's called taking a punch and throwing back one. If your brain keeps thinking about the punch to your jaw, you will amplify the damage that isn't as bad as your brain inclines it to be. Which also takes away from your power when you punch back.

Grow a pair

Casually aim and out DPS them? You're beating them with the RR in their optimal, and you **** on them with the RR outside of their optimal. That's not balance.

And you do realize that absolutely nothing changed about the MD, in fact it received a nerf because they took the smoke effect away?

*All stats are from prototype versions*
*Ranges can be found here*

[Comparison]
AR
Range: 45m optimal, 78m effective
DPS: (750 x 37.4 / 60) = 467.5
Damage profile: -10% shields, +10% armor

RR
Range: 75 optimal, 102 effective
DPS: (461.54 x 60.5 / 60) Gëê 465.39
Damage profile: +10% shields, -10% armor

[Analysis]
The RR is basically the same as the AR DPS-wise (about s 2 point difference), but with waaaaaaaaay more range; the RR's optimal range is almost as high as the AR's effective range. For this massive range advantage. The only downside is a bit of kick, and a short spool up time. There is a problem.

The RR must suffer disadvantages at close range (close range is meant to be the AR's domain) to counter its amazing long range, and lack of DPS sacrifice. The RR has to spool up as a close range disadvantage, but the problem is the spool up time is so negligible; this allows the RR to still be effective at close range. The RR has much more kick than the AR, but recoil only matters at long ranges.

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.

there is a reason sniper rifles don't have the same DPS as ARs. Same DPS plus a lot more range = OP. While the RR isn't a sniper rifle, the same principle applies here

[Solution]
It needs to have a higher spool up time (0.5 seconds) to make it not as good in close range. A damage or ROF reduction might also be necessary, something with that much range should not have as much DPS. I actually think the RR and breach AR should switch ROF stats, the RR is too good, and the breach AR doesn't have anything going for it.

The spool up time screws me all the damn time, KAGE. Especially when I'm using the non-assault version, especially when the enemy has cover nearby and playing peek-a-boo, and especially when the enemy is a heavy.

Being flanked during CQC is also a common bane to me because turning, acquiring, and firing a target takes a quarter second longer. This is a life-time in CQC engagements. However, this isn't nearly as big as a problem for the aRR because of the higher DPS.

Doubling the charge-up time would probably make the RR the way of the flaylock (dodo). It would become far too situational to use like Mass Driver or Laser Rifle. CCP doesn't exactly have a good track record of balancing weapons being nerfed, this includes my understand of how they treat EVE.



Then nerf the scanners. This can be applied to any weapon.
__________________________________

Lastly, I want to note that everyone is saying that CCP is going to reduce the base damage of almost every weapon. I don't know enough because I need to follow up on news more often.

However, demanding a nerf for any weapon, regardless of how overpowered it is, when the gungame itself is in the process of being changed is a bad idea. Everyone here is talking about the 1.7 RR, not 1.#whatever RR.

In my honest opinion, this discusion should be postponed until after the gungame is apparently eventually modified.

really RR isent OP only the combat is a bit, the only reason your getting killed so quikely is becuase your amour tanking and your at their optimal range, RR at point blank range does half the damage
AR noob

3/10 troll attempt.

Plenty of others have close range success with the RR contrary to your experience with one. You are not supposed to be effective at close range with it, as long as it is still great at medium to long range it will not go extinct. You are seriously making the case that a close range nerf to a medium-long range weapon is going to kill it.

Just to be clear, I know you have the best intentions in mind, KAGE. I know you want what's best for the game with true balance, unlike other people who just want their weapon/equipment/vehicle of choice to be king of everything.

Regarding your post, yes I do because objectives are in CQC situations. The RR should be in a small disadvantage, not unusable. If I can't even use a weapon in CQC then there is no point in using it. That is why snipers are useless in games like these.

In my opinion, every rifle except for sniper-like weapons should be usable at almost any range. If two people, one with an AR and the other with a RR, with equal FPS skill shoot each other in CQC, the guy with the AR should win 3/5 times and vice versa. The extreme of 9/10 times is irrational. I think part of the problem here is that people are getting killed in CQC a few times and people complain forgetting all the times when the RR guy didn't even get a chance to fire because of the charge time. If someone gets the up on someone else, regardless if he/she has a RR, he/she is usually going to win.

Not to sound accusational (is that a word?), are those who think the RR is OP mainly armor tank or have used the weapon? I ask this genuinely because I shield tank and I don't have a real problem with enemy RRs. And because I shield tank, I naturally think the ScR is OP, but I know that's unfair because then I'd be complaining about a weapon designed to kill my playstyle. I did think the Flaylock and Mass Driver was OP because explosive weapons was easily killing me, I believed I had merit there.

One of the issues I was having before the new rifles came out was how much more difficult it was for me to kill armor tankers because of my AR couldn't be used effectively against them. Things were made more difficult as more and more people armor tanked. At the same time, fewer and fewer people complained about the AR and ScR.....except for scouts of course. I don't know for sure, but I think it takes about the same amount of rounds to kill an ADV Gallente guy opposed to an ADV Caldari guy because of the nature of high hp armor and low hp shields with the hybrid-rail bonuses. This would take some complex math that I don't have time for right now. Would someone else mind doing the math for 422/150 vs. 150/500(?) with an ADV RR?

I suspect (but cannot confirm) that the armor guys met their one weakness, now that FL and MD are a rarity, and complaining about it. I wish a had stats on the Dust market place so I could prove or deny my hypothesis.

This outrageously long message was brought to you by The not Logic Bomb! Where no logic or stats were used, but sure wish he had them to prove some points.

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

I don't want it to be completely useless at close range, but I want close range weapons that only function at close range to have an actual edge against the RR at close range since that is their niche.

RR has almost identical DPS compared to the AR, and the spool up time doesn't make enough of a difference in CQC to really give close range weapons the edge they need. Why would anyone use an AR instead of RR?

0.5 spool up time would not make it useless in CQC, just give it enough of a disadvantage to balance out its range advantage.

I would be fine if the RR's spool up time stays the same, but the DPS (preferably through ROF decrease) was reduced to make the AR shine in its own element. AR should have a clear DPS advantage.

I also think you are underestimating the medium and long range weapon usefulness. You don't have to get that close to an objective to make a difference, from 40-50 meters away you can clear an objective from enemies and be very useful.

Yeah, I'm an armor tanker, but I don't let it cloud my judgement when it comes to balance; I have always defended the mass driver from claims of it being OP despite being susceptible to it. I didn't make the thread because RRs kill me

*All stats are from prototype versions*
*Ranges can be found here*

[Comparison]
AR
Range: 45m optimal, 78m effective
DPS: (750 x 37.4 / 60) = 467.5
Damage profile: -10% shields, +10% armor

RR
Range: 75 optimal, 102 effective
DPS: (461.54 x 60.5 / 60) Gëê 465.39
Damage profile: +10% shields, -10% armor

[Analysis]
The RR is basically the same as the AR DPS-wise (about s 2 point difference), but with waaaaaaaaay more range; the RR's optimal range is almost as high as the AR's effective range. For this massive range advantage. The only downside is a bit of kick, and a short spool up time. There is a problem.

The RR must suffer disadvantages at close range (close range is meant to be the AR's domain) to counter its amazing long range, and lack of DPS sacrifice. The RR has to spool up as a close range disadvantage, but the problem is the spool up time is so negligible; this allows the RR to still be effective at close range. The RR has much more kick than the AR, but recoil only matters at long ranges.

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.

there is a reason sniper rifles don't have the same DPS as ARs. Same DPS plus a lot more range = OP. While the RR isn't a sniper rifle, the same principle applies here

[Solution]
It needs to have a higher spool up time (0.5 seconds) to make it not as good in close range. A damage or ROF reduction might also be necessary, something with that much range should not have as much DPS. I actually think the RR and breach AR should switch ROF stats, the RR is too good, and the breach AR doesn't have anything going for it.

Just to be clear, I know you have the best intentions in mind, KAGE. I know you want what's best for the game with true balance, unlike other people who just want their weapon/equipment/vehicle of choice to be king of everything.

Regarding your post, yes I do because objectives are in CQC situations. The RR should be in a small disadvantage, not unusable. If I can't even use a weapon in CQC then there is no point in using it. That is why snipers are useless in games like these.

In my opinion, every rifle except for sniper-like weapons should be usable at almost any range. If two people, one with an AR and the other with a RR, with equal FPS skill shoot each other in CQC, the guy with the AR should win 3/5 times and vice versa. The extreme of 9/10 times is irrational. I think part of the problem here is that people are getting killed in CQC a few times and people complain forgetting all the times when the RR guy didn't even get a chance to fire because of the charge time. If someone gets the up on someone else, regardless if he/she has a RR, he/she is usually going to win.

Not to sound accusational (is that a word?), are those who think the RR is OP mainly armor tank or have used the weapon? I ask this genuinely because I shield tank and I don't have a real problem with enemy RRs. And because I shield tank, I naturally think the ScR is OP, but I know that's unfair because then I'd be complaining about a weapon designed to kill my playstyle. I did think the Flaylock and Mass Driver was OP because explosive weapons was easily killing me, I believed I had merit there.

One of the issues I was having before the new rifles came out was how much more difficult it was for me to kill armor tankers because of my AR couldn't be used effectively against them. Things were made more difficult as more and more people armor tanked. At the same time, fewer and fewer people complained about the AR and ScR.....except for scouts of course. I don't know for sure, but I think it takes about the same amount of rounds to kill an ADV Gallente guy opposed to an ADV Caldari guy because of the nature of high hp armor and low hp shields with the hybrid-rail bonuses. This would take some complex math that I don't have time for right now. Would someone else mind doing the math for 422/150 vs. 150/500(?) with an ADV RR?

I suspect (but cannot confirm) that the armor guys met their one weakness, now that FL and MD are a rarity, and complaining about it. I wish a had stats on the Dust market place so I could prove or deny my hypothesis.

This outrageously long message was brought to you by The not Logic Bomb! Where no logic or stats were used, but sure wish he had them to prove some points.

"How did I beat you?"

"You're too fast"

"Do you believe me being faster or stronger has anything to do with the muscles in this place?"

"Don't think you are...know you are"

Great conversation between Morpheus and Neo. Morpheus tells him to stop trying to hit him and hit him.

And read the context, smart one. Some guy mentioned the MD. I told him even though it was a nuisance, my mind didn't respond with "oh that's OP, they need to nerf that". No, I didn't give them the pleasure. Instead I searched for ways to beat them.

When I face adversity, I don't cry like the lot does. I won't allow it. I search a way to beat them, because there's always a way.

Seriously, you guys shouldn't even call yourself mercenaries anymore.

I don't want it to be completely useless at close range, but I want close range weapons that only function at close range to have an actual edge against the RR at close range since that is their niche.

RR has almost identical DPS compared to the AR, and the spool up time doesn't make enough of a difference in CQC to really give close range weapons the edge they need. Why would anyone use an AR instead of RR?

0.5 spool up time would not make it useless in CQC, just give it enough of a disadvantage to balance out its range advantage.

I would be fine if the RR's spool up time stays the same, but the DPS (preferably through ROF decrease) was reduced to make the AR shine in its own element. AR should have a clear DPS advantage.

I also think you are underestimating the medium and long range weapon usefulness. You don't have to get that close to an objective to make a difference, from 40-50 meters away you can clear an objective from enemies and be very useful.

Yeah, I'm an armor tanker, but I don't let it cloud my judgement when it comes to balance; I have always defended the mass driver from claims of it being OP despite being susceptible to it. I didn't make the thread because RRs kill me

*All stats are from prototype versions*
*Ranges can be found here*

[Comparison]
AR
Range: 45m optimal, 78m effective
DPS: (750 x 37.4 / 60) = 467.5
Damage profile: -10% shields, +10% armor

RR
Range: 75 optimal, 102 effective
DPS: (461.54 x 60.5 / 60) Gëê 465.39
Damage profile: +10% shields, -10% armor

[Analysis]
The RR is basically the same as the AR DPS-wise (about s 2 point difference), but with waaaaaaaaay more range; the RR's optimal range is almost as high as the AR's effective range. For this massive range advantage. The only downside is a bit of kick, and a short spool up time. There is a problem.

The RR must suffer disadvantages at close range (close range is meant to be the AR's domain) to counter its amazing long range, and lack of DPS sacrifice. The RR has to spool up as a close range disadvantage, but the problem is the spool up time is so negligible; this allows the RR to still be effective at close range. The RR has much more kick than the AR, but recoil only matters at long ranges.

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.

there is a reason sniper rifles don't have the same DPS as ARs. Same DPS plus a lot more range = OP. While the RR isn't a sniper rifle, the same principle applies here

[Solution]
It needs to have a higher spool up time (0.5 seconds) to make it not as good in close range. A damage or ROF reduction might also be necessary, something with that much range should not have as much DPS. I actually think the RR and breach AR should switch ROF stats, the RR is too good, and the breach AR doesn't have anything going for it.

KAGE, first I have a lot of respect for your opinions and I appreciate the mature and logical approach when laying this out.

My isssue and I think to degree Martin Kirby's is the effect of the charge time is NOT the way to go on balancing this rifle specifically. There are other ways of controlling or shaping the balance of the base weapons. I have a very similar experience with Martin in CQC - the intended effect of the spool time does in fact put me at a real disadvantage. In fact, I routinely switch to my SMG when pushing into an OBJ or transitioning through tight areas of the maps to gain back that critical reaction time.

I don't think anyone doubts this is a difficult area to determine how to use the subtlest of touches to achieve the desired effect on weapon function or balance between weapons. I think the spool time is one of those factors that can legitmately ruin a weapon if you go a shade overboard with the tweak. Additionally, this is one of the few drawback mechanics that do not have some method of offsetting them; examples would be Amarr advantages for SCR overheat, Minmatar bonuses ref. ammo supply, and in the skill trees how you tone down dispersion, recoil, and ammo capacity via SP investment.

The concern of tapping R1 to overcome the spool issue can be fixed. Similar to how large rail turrets work if you balk on the trigger (come off it before firing a round) you incur an increased charge delay.

The most logical area to tweak seems to be the hip fire accuracy. You could lower that factor and that would make a fair amount of sense...this is a pretty common trade off for distance weapons in other games. In the same vein you could slightly increase the hip fire accuracy of the AR to give an even greater advantage to the opposite racial (i.e. caldari vs gallente) weapon.

Sorry could you break down your DPS calculation for me.

ROF stat in the game shows rounds minute, so I divided by 60 to get the rounds per second. I multiply the rounds per second by the damage of each round to get damage per second.