If a 1200 damage forge gun got a nerf of 10pts. Would that be a greater, or lesser nerf than what the AR is receiving?

The damage reduction to the Rail & Combat rifles is roughly proportional to that of the AR & ScR.

The damage reduction to the Rail & Combat rifles is roughly proportional to that of the AR & ScR.

Seriously CCP did you really think this would fly?
We've known the new rifles are OP for months now, and we were told they were getting a nerf.
A net nerf to a whole group of weapons is not what we wanted to hear.

So you were either too dim to tell that we didn't want an AR nerf, or you deliberately deceived us.

You...Don't make sense.

Answering your question first, no. 10 pts of a nerf for a 1200 damage weapon wouldn't matter.

The Rail Rifle and CR are different from the Forge Gun because they're closer to the AR in damage.

This is roughly the same level of stupid as "tanks aren't supposed to be killed by infantry".

Just in case you're not trolling...

ScR has more than double the damage per shot of the AR. Thus, a 7 point (around 10%) decrease for the ScR has a smaller impact on its effectiveness than a 4 point (around 12%) decrease does for the AR.

Holy crap man there's no hope for you.

So apparently 425 DPS for the AR is too much, but the CR is still going to have 540 DPS??

In what world does this make any type of sense?

There is a lot more armour HP on the average battlefield. Reducing armour damage for the AR is another nerf. RRs have never had any trouble chewing through shields.

You...Don't make sense.

Answering your question first, no. 10 pts of a nerf for a 1200 damage weapon wouldn't matter.

The Rail Rifle and CR are different from the Forge Gun because they're closer to the AR in damage.

Well guess what? Now they will!

Telling me "Do you percentage bro" didn't help me understand that you were referring to this exactly...

Anyways.

The ScR isn't an automatic weapon like the RR or AR. It's a high alpha damage weapon that overheats. The AR is a rapid fire weapon that doesn't have the same drastic overheating issue and a recoil that can be controlled easily.

You can only nerf it so much before it stops being efficient. If you nerf it with the same percentage as the AR's nerf, it wouldn't do anything. Any worse of a nerf and it becomes much more viable to use the RR in it's place.

No they won't, that's my point.

The -10% to shields will be felt by RR users with the proficiency changes. There will be much more skill involved, your going to see a lot of fluxing and switching to side arms.

The -10% to shields will be felt by RR users with the proficiency changes. There will be much more skill involved, your going to see a lot of fluxing and switching to side arms.

I assumed you'd know which percentages we're talking about given they're right here here in this table, which is probably where you got the damage decrease numbers from. But sorry if that assumption was incorrect.

You make a reasonable point about the ScR overheat becoming more of an issue with a damage decrease. But there's a similar issue with the AR - a damage nerf means you effectively get to the end of the clip sooner. That's not really a limiting factor for the ScR as there's a massive amount of damage in the clip.

The basic point is that the AR is nowhere near competitive with the RR or CR, and gaining 3% damage relative to them isn't going to change that. The ScR is closer to being a competitive weapon so it's hard to see why the AR is getting nerfed harder.

[o-O It was but I didn't look at the percentages much. 30-34 isn't that much of a difference for the AR when everyone else gets a nerf. I mean, looking at the damage pts for the other rifles and looking at how I've been playing with the AR up until now, it really doesn't matter.

And honestly. What would you consider the right amount of nerf(or buff) for the AR to be competitive with the current nerfs for the other rifles?

Maybe 5% nerf? So it effectively gains 10% on RR/CR and 5% on ScR. And no nerf at all for the AR variants, as they're really nowhere near viable at the moment.

About 12% for the AR vs 16% for RR.
Plus proficiency changes mean the AR will do less damage to armour.

Fluxing? Since when can we throw fluxes 100m?

Less damage to shields is meaningless when armour is the tanking option of choice.
Do you really think anybody is going to slap an extra extender on their suit & think "yeah, this'll save me from those Rails"?

Wouldn't it be 15%? 3% damage per level x 5.

Fluxing? Since when can we throw fluxes 100m?

Less damage to shields is meaningless when armour is the tanking option of choice.
Do you really think anybody is going to slap an extra extender on their suit & think "yeah, this'll save me from those Rails"?

Nope, with these nerfs and damage fall off against shields RR is probably gonna have to be in effective if their shields are up. So you will probably see a lot of caldari tactics of kiting slow moving armor tanked suits fluxes around corners while the shield suit is already at range. I think you also completely missed the part where I said switching to side arms, that's gonna be extremely imortant in 1.8.

Less damage to shields has alot of meaning and your failure to recognize that shows your scrublyness. People will have to be more conscious about their engagement's now. Armor suits are gonna have a hard time with this but shield suits should already know about this with the scrambler taking out your main tank in one shot.
People are already talking about brick tanking, and no a shield extended on a gallente suit probably won't save you, that's why you have to know your strengths and weaknesses. Shield tanking in a shield suit will defiantly give you an edge on RR and CR but make you weak against PR and SCR.
Do you even tactics?

Oh, also the breach assault rifle is being nerfed almost as much as the CR/RR.
You know, that thing which already has the lowest DPS of any rifle as well as the lowest range and fire rate.