|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Asher Night
Dark Tengu
494
   |
Posted - 2014.03.05 15:35:00 -
[1] - Quote
Texs Red wrote:AR in 1.8
48 meters optimal, 78 effective
412.5 DPS at prototype
1,980 damage per clip (barely capable of killing well tanked 1.8 sentinal suits)
Magsec SMG
48 meters optimal, 66 effective
427.7 DPS at prototype
2,079 damage per clp
The Magsec SMG has more damage per clip and a great DPS than the assault rifle, and it's a sidearm! It's number were okay before all the rifles were getting their damage lowered but now it's actually superior in DPS to at least one of them with equal range.
Rail Rifle in 1.8
78 optimal, 102 effective
397.6 DPS at prototype
2,171 damage per clip
Assault Combat Rifle in 1.8
54 meters optimal, 84 effective
420 DPS at prototype
1,428 damage per clip
Assault Scrambler Rifle in 1.8
60 optimal, 90 effective
420.5 DPS at prototype
2,574 damage per clip
The SMG is a close quarters weapon, so it should be deadlier. Who do you think is more likely to win 1 on 1 at 50m out: the magsec or any of those rifles? Most CQC weapons in any FPS has a higher DPS. What's more is it has an even higher charge up time than a RR (which logically doesn't make sense). I don't know about you all but I am way more likely to survive against a rail rifle user if I meet them up close, so that charge up time will be a big drawback for the magsec.
There is nothing wrong here.
100% Tactical Scout Corporation
|
Asher Night
Dark Tengu
494
|
Posted - 2014.03.05 17:14:00 -
[2] - Quote
Jack McReady wrote:just like with the tank changes CCP again have shown their super math skills  Asher Night wrote:Texs Red wrote:AR in 1.8
48 meters optimal, 78 effective
412.5 DPS at prototype
1,980 damage per clip (barely capable of killing well tanked 1.8 sentinal suits)
Magsec SMG
48 meters optimal, 66 effective
427.7 DPS at prototype
2,079 damage per clp
The Magsec SMG has more damage per clip and a great DPS than the assault rifle, and it's a sidearm! It's number were okay before all the rifles were getting their damage lowered but now it's actually superior in DPS to at least one of them with equal range.
Rail Rifle in 1.8
78 optimal, 102 effective
397.6 DPS at prototype
2,171 damage per clip
Assault Combat Rifle in 1.8
54 meters optimal, 84 effective
420 DPS at prototype
1,428 damage per clip
Assault Scrambler Rifle in 1.8
60 optimal, 90 effective
420.5 DPS at prototype
2,574 damage per clip The SMG is a close quarters weapon, so it should be deadlier. Who do you think is more likely to win 1 on 1 at 50m out: the magsec or any of those rifles? Most CQC weapons in any FPS has a higher DPS. What's more is it has an even higher charge up time than a RR (which logically doesn't make sense). I don't know about you all but I am way more likely to survive against a rail rifle user if I meet them up close, so that charge up time will be a big drawback for the magsec. There is nothing wrong here. hello reading and logic fail 
Oh, the irony.
Explain what I have misread.
Explain what logical fallacy you have noticed.
Do not be a snarky brat who does not actually make points in his debating.
I'm confident that I have understood everything you have said (I admit I may be wrong), and my argument refutes your central point.
You're the one crying about a weapon before literally even one single bullet has been fired or a single kill has been made with it. How's that for a logic fail...
100% Tactical Scout Corporation
|
Asher Night
Dark Tengu
494
|
Posted - 2014.03.05 19:09:00 -
[3] - Quote
Korvin Lomont wrote:Asher Night wrote:Texs Red wrote:AR in 1.8
48 meters optimal, 78 effective
412.5 DPS at prototype
1,980 damage per clip (barely capable of killing well tanked 1.8 sentinal suits)
Magsec SMG
48 meters optimal, 66 effective
427.7 DPS at prototype
2,079 damage per clp
The Magsec SMG has more damage per clip and a great DPS than the assault rifle, and it's a sidearm! It's number were okay before all the rifles were getting their damage lowered but now it's actually superior in DPS to at least one of them with equal range.
Rail Rifle in 1.8
78 optimal, 102 effective
397.6 DPS at prototype
2,171 damage per clip
Assault Combat Rifle in 1.8
54 meters optimal, 84 effective
420 DPS at prototype
1,428 damage per clip
Assault Scrambler Rifle in 1.8
60 optimal, 90 effective
420.5 DPS at prototype
2,574 damage per clip The SMG is a close quarters weapon, so it should be deadlier. Who do you think is more likely to win 1 on 1 at 50m out: the magsec or any of those rifles? Most CQC weapons in any FPS has a higher DPS. What's more is it has an even higher charge up time than a RR (which logically doesn't make sense). I don't know about you all but I am way more likely to survive against a rail rifle user if I meet them up close, so that charge up time will be a big drawback for the magsec. There is nothing wrong here. I bet you will be wrong the charge is nearly a non issue for the RR thanks to tighter hipfire an my guess this will be true for the MagSec as well. Apart from that there is no reason to use the SMG any longer as the MagSec will outperform the SMG in everyway, the MagSec can directly compete with the AR!! Thats wrong totally wrong. Sometimes I believe no one at CCP knows some basic maths or they simply have no clue on balancing :/. I Havent used the AR since 1.7 as it is already outclassed by the other Rifles now it even gets outclassed by sidearms... I really hope for a respec so I can use my wasted SP elsewhere its sad sooo sad...
Are you new to FPS's? How is that totally wrong? All weapons should compete with each other. Battlefield, Resistance, MAG (probably Cod but I've never played it) - all FPS's with SMG's make them competitive to all other run amd gun weapons. That is not totally wrong. If the Smg had very low cpu/pg req's for proto then yeah, maybe it would be OP, but it's still proportionally high so it's not like you just grab the weapon and you win. You still have to fit it. It will probably have lower cpu/pg than a rifle, but the short range and charge up time seem to balance it out.
This isn't totally wrong. It's probably one of the most important steps to diversifying gameplay that CCP has taken. Scouts are essentially stuck with shotguns or remote exploives if they want to be competitive. This opens doors that anyone can walk through.
100% Tactical Scout Corporation
|
Asher Night
Dark Tengu
497
|
Posted - 2014.03.06 00:09:00 -
[4] - Quote
Texs Red wrote:Asher Night wrote:
Are you new to FPS's? How is that totally wrong? All weapons should compete with each other. Battlefield, Resistance, MAG (probably Cod but I've never played it) - all FPS's with SMG's make them competitive to all other run amd gun weapons. That is not totally wrong. If the Smg had very low cpu/pg req's for proto then yeah, maybe it would be OP, but it's still proportionally high so it's not like you just grab the weapon and you win. You still have to fit it. It will probably have lower cpu/pg than a rifle, but the short range and charge up time seem to balance it out.
This isn't totally wrong. It's probably one of the most important steps to diversifying gameplay that CCP has taken. Scouts are essentially stuck with shotguns or remote exploives if they want to be competitive. This opens doors that anyone can walk through.
The problem isn't that it is competitive, it's that it is out performing a primary.
I respect your right to have your opinion but I don't think you actually understand yourself. It only outperforms primaries when applied at its respected scenario, like the shotgun or sniper rifle, or nearly any other weapon.
And again, you mention it as a sidearm but I don't think you understand how much PG/CPU a sidearm can take. It gets to a point where it doesn't matter if it's a sidearm - because of the cpu/pg - it's gonna have to be your main. I don't think you've ever specced into a sidearm or else you'd know mid-tier/proto sidearms are clearly supposed to be main weapons. Why should I have to automatically die because my main weapon is a sidearm and your main weapon is light, even though we're at a distance where a sidearm should be effective?
100% Tactical Scout Corporation
|
|
|
| |
|