| Pages: 1 :: [one page] |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Crimson Cerberes
Hammer Of Light
Vanguard of the Phoenix
388
   |
Posted - 2014.03.05 17:58:00 -
[1] - Quote
It is not that hard CCP.
40% more range? 40% less damage. |
Tallen Ellecon
KILL-EM-QUICK
RISE of LEGION
1539
|
Posted - 2014.03.05 18:01:00 -
[2] - Quote
Maybe not that extreme, but shorter ranged weapons should do more damage than their longer range counterparts.
Where is my Gallente sidearm? 1.8? When is that? SoonGäó514
"No blue tags make Tallen go crazy."
|
RedZer0 MK1
The Generals
General Tso's Alliance
199
|
Posted - 2014.03.05 18:04:00 -
[3] - Quote
Yep, for the most part. |
ZDub 303
TeamPlayers
Negative-Feedback
2313
|
Posted - 2014.03.05 18:13:00 -
[4] - Quote
and a weapon with 100% more range should have 100% less damage.
In fact, comparing the sniper rifle with the assault rifle, it should be healing enemy suits for somewhere around 300-400 per shot. bonus healing to armor and penalty healing to shields applied of course.
It is true though, longer range should correlate with less dps, probably not on a % for % basis though. |
Crimson Cerberes
Hammer Of Light
Vanguard of the Phoenix
388
|
Posted - 2014.03.05 18:19:00 -
[5] - Quote
ZDub 303 wrote:and a weapon with 100% more range should have 100% less damage.
In fact, comparing the sniper rifle with the assault rifle, it should be healing enemy suits for somewhere around 300-400 per shot. bonus healing to armor and penalty healing to shields applied of course.
It is true though, longer range should correlate with less dps, probably not on a % for % basis though.
Ok let me amend that.
1.4 times the range, divide the DPS by 1.4 as well.
2 times the range, half the DPS.
Yes it should be that strong of a difference. An AR should absolutely DESTROY a RR in the AR optimal. a HMG should DESTROY a AR in it's optimal. so on and so on.
Think about it, the AR does less than 30% damage at the RRs optimal, why should the RR be both 100% effective and 90% of the DPS in the AR optimal?
Also read the OP, DPS. the sniper rifle has abysmal DPS. |
Derpty Derp
It's All Gone Derp
90
|
Posted - 2014.03.05 18:22:00 -
[6] - Quote
ZDub 303 wrote:and a weapon with 100% more range should have 100% less damage.
In fact, comparing the sniper rifle with the assault rifle, it should be healing enemy suits for somewhere around 300-400 per shot. bonus healing to armor and penalty healing to shields applied of course.
It is true though, longer range should correlate with less dps, probably not on a % for % basis though.
Healing dart sniper!!! I want one! |
True Adamance
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
7879
|
Posted - 2014.03.05 18:26:00 -
[7] - Quote
I don't think things have to be that drastic I'm pretty much fine with how the rifles are working now besides the plasma rifle which needs a buff.
"War is not hell, far from it. War is beautiful. War is divine."
- Grand Admiral Mekioth Sarum
|
ZDub 303
TeamPlayers
Negative-Feedback
2316
|
Posted - 2014.03.05 18:28:00 -
[8] - Quote
I'm not disagreeing with you necessarily. Just trolling.
Its not nearly as simple as you are thinking though.
I'm sure not if I have the exact numbers right but I think the AR is 40 optimal and 65 effective? and the rail is 65 optimal and 85 effective?
So by your math the AR is at 30% at 65m, and the RR should be somewhere around 40/85 times the damage of the AR? So at 50% max AR damage at its own optimal?
You can start to see I think why this would render the rail rifle completely useless?
I would never use a rail rifle that is only putting out ~15 damage per shot when the AR puts out 30 per shot and then drops only to 10 at 65m. Not a significant trade off for the massive closer quarter dps increase.
However... the rail should have lower dps like you say due to its longer optimal |
Ryme Intrinseca
Fatal Absolution
General Tso's Alliance
844
|
Posted - 2014.03.05 18:29:00 -
[9] - Quote
Crimson Cerberes wrote:It is not that hard CCP.
40% more range? 40% less DPS.
Maybe 40% more range, 20% less damage would be reasonable. Not 40% more range, 4% damage, which seems to be CCP's current model (RR vs AR, Magsec vs SMG, etc). |
Ashelia Skybrooke
Zumari Force Projection
Caldari State
24
|
Posted - 2014.03.05 18:32:00 -
[10] - Quote
No.
Weapons should have optimal ranges and dominate in those ranges, regardless of what those ranges are. The problem you have is that some long range weapons are dominate in cqc, and some mid range weapons are dominant in long range (although I can't think of any close range weapons dominant in long...so that's a plus). The weapons that have the easiest time at all ranges, those are the ones that should do the least DPS. Either that or be given a certain allotted niche. Either's fine.
I assume you're talking about the rail rifle. |
|
|
Chunky Munkey
Amarr Templars
Amarr Empire
3335
|
Posted - 2014.03.05 18:37:00 -
[11] - Quote
Crimson Cerberes wrote:It is not that hard CCP.
40% more range? 40% less DPS.
+40% is not proportional to -40%
-%ages are far more significant changes than +%ages.
No.
|
Crimson Cerberes
Hammer Of Light
Vanguard of the Phoenix
389
|
Posted - 2014.03.05 18:50:00 -
[12] - Quote
ZDub 303 wrote:I'm not disagreeing with you necessarily. Just trolling.
Its not nearly as simple as you are thinking though.
I'm sure not if I have the exact numbers right but I think the AR is 40 optimal and 65 effective? and the rail is 65 optimal and 85 effective?
So by your math the AR is at 30% at 65m, and the RR should be somewhere around 40/85 times the damage of the AR? So at 50% max AR damage at its own optimal?
You can start to see I think why this would render the rail rifle completely useless?
I would never use a rail rifle that is only putting out ~15 damage per shot when the AR puts out 30 per shot and then drops only to 10 at 65m. Not a significant trade off for the massive closer quarter dps increase.
However... the rail should have lower dps like you say due to its longer optimal
Check out ranges here
The Rail rifle has 1.65 times more range than the AR, it should do 0.606 times the damage.
IF you were to follow this damage paradigm, it would make sense.
The combat rifle, having 1.35 times more range, would do 0.72 times the damage.
The scrambler has 1.65 times more optimal, but much faster fall-off than the other rifles, so maybe 0.62 times the damage.
*by damage I mean DPS
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 :: [one page] |