DUST Search - An analysis of the GÇÿexpanding the arsenalGÇÖ devblog and TTK in 1.8

All Channels

General Discussions

An analysis of the GÇÿexpanding the arsenalGÇÖ devblog and TTK in 1.8

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Arkena Wyrnspire Fatal Absolution 10498	Posted - 2014.03.06 20:10:00 - [1] - Quote This is going to be a long thread. I would like this to be a productive discussion. Please refrain from comments such as GÇÿlol u nerdGÇÖ GÇÿu hav no life lolGÇÖ etc. At long last, weGÇÖve gotten a devblog on key changes to weaponry and modules affecting TTK. IGÇÖm sure everyone has probably seen the changes by now, but hereGÇÖs a quick summary: All rifles damage output nerfed, SMG also nerfed (12% plasma rifle, 10% scrambler rifle, 16% combat rifle, 9% assault combat rifle, 14% rail rifle, 9% SMG) Damage mods nerfed to 3%/4%/5% damage increase for standard/enhanced/complex. Proficiency skill changed from direct damage bonus to increased affinity damage (RR proficiency gives 15% bonus to armour rather than 15% to both shields and armour) Three new weapons introduced GÇô bolt pistol, magsec SMG, and ion pistol Mass drivers buffed significantly for damage Laser rifles buffed in range, scope, CQC damage, and heat build-up LetGÇÖs look at all of this in sections, and then look at the overall effect that these sweeping changes will have. [P1] Rifle comparisons [P2] Sidearm comparisons [P3] Damage mod changes [P4] Proficiency changes [P5] Overall effect analysis + predictions Firstly, letGÇÖs analyse the new stats of all the weapons. We will begin with straight DPS comparisons. Any weapon which will likely be unable to reach its maximum DPS because itGÇÖs a semi-automatic or burst weapon will be indicated with an asterisk . This excludes charge mechanics. DPS at standard: Assault plasma rifle: 375 Breach plasma rifle: 300 Burst plasma rifle: ~350 Tactical plasma rifle: 420* Scrambler rifle: 750* DPS Assault scrambler rifle: 380 DPS Combat rifle: 540* DPS Assault combat rifle: 380 DPS Rail rifle: 440 DPS Assault rail rifle: 375 DPS SMG: 350 DPS Scrambler Pistol: 530 DPS* Not including headshots Magsec SMG: 355 DPS Bolt pistol: 340 DPS Ion pistol: 310 DPS* HMG: 600 DPS What can we see from this? We can see that with the exception of the semi-automatic/burst weapons, all the DPS values are very similar for their class. The RR has significantly higher DPS than the other fully automatics, but it has a short charge time. Accounting for the charge time brings the weapon down to a similar DPS level. [P1] Rifle comparisons A very notable difference between rifles is the range profile. The plasma rifles have the shortest range, the combat rifles outranges the plasma rifle, the scrambler rifles outrange the combat rifles, and the rail rifles outrange all the other rifles. Range is, quite obviously, a significant advantage. A longer range than the opponent can offer a huge tactical edge. So naturally, if a weapon has a longer range than another, then if theyGÇÖre well balanced against each other the shorter ranged weapon will be better in another area. Here we have a set of weapons with very similar DPS stats and general operation, but varying ranges. Compare the ACR and the plasma rifle. The ACR does not fall down significantly in any major area compared to the plasma rifle. However, it beats the plasma rifle on range. I see this as a big problem. Look at the plasma assault rifle DPS. Look at the other assault weapons. There is very little DPS difference, but all of these other weapons outrange the plasma rifle. This is the case for the ASCR vs the ACR as well. The ARR isnGÇÖt as bad because of the charge time, but it too has similar DPS at a much, much greater range without any major penalties. Basic Rifle Comparison Summary/TL;DR: DPS differences between rifles are insignificant. Range differences are significant. The tradeoffs for longer range are insignificant. As a result, long range weapons are better in this model. Shorter ranged weapons should have a higher DPS from trading off range. They donGÇÖt. This should be corrected. Now letGÇÖs look at some discrepancies and silly things about the rifle class as a whole. Firstly, the plasma rifle variants. As a general rule, they are terrible. Before we start looking at each of them specifically, IGÇÖd just like to address this claim: forum myth wrote: the plasma rifles variants are knockoffs of the other rifles so they should be worse I find this statement to be completely inadequate. It is poor or lazy design to have a weapon that is simply GÇÿworseGÇÖ than others. Especially as the assault variants of the other weapons are GÇÿmimicsGÇÖ of the plasma assault rifle and yet are as good as or better than it. A prime example of the variants being bad is the breach assault rifle. Presently, it has the lowest DPS of any rifle, by a long margin. However, it is being nerfed by the same percentage as the main plasma rifle, and is being nerfed more than much stronger weapons such as the ACR. This is lazy work GÇô itGÇÖs not a case of the breach actually needing this nerf, because itGÇÖs blatantly obvious that it doesnGÇÖt. This appears to be simply a case of the breach having not been looked at as its own weapon and just hit with a blanket nerf. It is entirely unnecessary. As it happens, even with pre-nerf stats it would have the lowest DPS of any 1.8 rifle. LetGÇÖs look at the burst plasma rifle. The natural competitor to this weapon is the normal combat rifle. The two weapons, come 1.8, have exactly the same damage per shot. The combat rifle has a higher range and rate of fire, by a very significant margin. This is an example of two weapons that are not balanced against each other. The combat rifle is simply better than the burst assault rifle. You have long since made your choice. What you make now is a mistake.
Arkena Wyrnspire Fatal Absolution 10498	Posted - 2014.03.06 20:10:00 - [2] - Quote This should not be the case. Both weapons should have roles, outperforming the other in one way but underperforming in comparison in another way. For this example, the shortest range plasma rifle would likely be better suited to having a higher damage per shot and DPS but notably lower RPM and range. That way, both weapons have their own role. LetGÇÖs look at the tactical plasma rifle. There is a similar situation here as with the other variants GÇô the weapon is simply outclassed. Compare it to the scrambler rifle. The TAR has less damage per shot, almost half the RoF (although on a semi-automatic the SCR RoF cap is never going to be reached, this makes oversampling a problem on the TAR), a much smaller range, and no charge shot function. There is no overheat, but the SCR overheats at a similar point to the TAR needing to reload, so functionally they are not dissimilar. The hipfire spread is vastly wider. The one point in which it could potentially be considered better is that it has a more balanced shield/armour affinity at 125/90 compared to 135/80. Again, I donGÇÖt think this should be so. Rather than having the weapon simply be inferior, redefine its role. It can be shorter ranged than the SCR, absolutely! It may well be so that it should have a lower RoF too. However, by trading that off it should gain something else. Perhaps it should be able to outdamage the SCR, for instance, by gaining a powerful single shot hit at its lower range and RoF. There is another design flaw in the 1.8 rifle class that is immediately apparent on looking at the new damage chart. The State Kaalakiota Specialist Rail Rifle has more damage than the prototype Kaalakiota Rail Rifle, at 1.7 damage more. None of the other specialist weapons have this feature. Rifle Design Flaws + Discrepancies Summary/TL;DR All the plasma rifle variants are poor weapons and have no role GÇô especially in the case of the breach variant, which is by far the weakest rifle and would still be the weakest even if it carried its pre-nerf stats into 1.8. The specialist RR mysteriously has more damage than the prototype one. No other specialist weapon exhibits this property. [P2] Sidearm comparisons LetGÇÖs go back to our DPS comparisons for the sidearms. ItGÇÖs worth noting as well that the ion pistol and scrambler pistol are both semi-automatic, meaning that they will very rarely attain their full DPS value, especially in the case of the ion pistol where the restrictively low RoF means that taps will not always translate to shots, a phenomenon known as oversampling. The RoF of the ion pistol is 375 RPM. At 50 damage a shot, with a maxed fire rate this translates to 312.5 DPS. It does, however, have a charge shot mechanic which allows you to charge up a shot for 1.45 seconds for 350 damage. This gives an effective engagement DPS of 241, but can be used for alpha purposes. The RoF of the magsec SMG is 666 RPM. At 35 damage a shot, this translates to 388 DPS. The RoF of scrambler pistol is 400 RPM. At 80 damage a shot, this translates to 533 DPS. Notably, it also has a 450% damage bonus on headshots. The RoF of the submachine gun is 1000 RPM. At 21 damage a shot this translates to 350 DPS. The RoF of the bolt pistol is 150 RPM. At 135 damage a shot, this translates to 337.5 DPS. From this damage assessment we can see that the ion pistol is the weakest sidearm in terms of damage output when not considering the charge time on the bolt pistol and magsec SMGs. With those, it slightly outperforms them GÇô but only slightly. A note on charge delay GÇô it is easily mitigated by pre-charging as the opponent comes around a corner, or constantly tapping the trigger as you move around ensuring you are charged up and ready to go at any time. This does not entirely discount the charge time GÇô it is a hindrance, but it is not a significant one. The charge shot mechanic of the ion pistol is not notable for any practical application. Upon firing a charge shot, the weapon will immediately overheat GÇô rendering follow-up shots useless. The alpha damage is not high enough to kill many opponents, so using the charge shot means you will be helpless. Additionally, using the charge shot as a follow-up to normal shots does not work because the charge time is too long and you would be better served by using normal shots. Now. Consider the sustained damage capability of each of these sidearms. The ion pistol has 12 shots in a clip before needing to reload. This gives 600 damage per clip. There is also possibly an overheat mechanic, though this is only known for the charge shot. The magsec SMG has 54 shots in a clip before needing to reload. This gives 1890 damage per clip. The SMG has 80 rounds per clip for 1760 damage per clip. The scrambler pistol has 11 rounds per clip for approximately 880 damage per clip, without headshots. The bolt pistol has 6 rounds per clip for 810 damage per clip. The ion pistol is thoroughly outperformed by the other weapons in sustained damage output. The other weapons in its class give up to triple the damage per clip, with the exception of the bolt pistol, which is not much better. This is more of a handicap than it appears as well GÇô many opponents have more than 600 EHP, meaning a reload is absolutely necessary for the ion pistol (and potentially the bolt pistol) where it wouldnGÇÖt be for the other sidearms. The pistols generally have lower damage per clip than the SMGs, but the ion pistol pistol still has the lowest in class there as well. You have long since made your choice. What you make now is a mistake.
Sgt Kirk Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 4891	Posted - 2014.03.06 20:11:00 - [3] - Quote Finally, we have the range. Ion pistol GÇô 20m optimal. SMG GÇô 25-30m optimal. Scrambler pistol GÇô 30-35m optimal. Magsec SMG GÇô 40m optimal. Bolt pistol GÇô 45m optimal. This is huge. The ion pistol is not just the shortest ranged sidearm, it is by far the shortest ranged sidearm. Even its closest competitor can get up to 50% more range than it GÇô and the rail sidearms have over double the range. The ion pistol is completely unable to retaliate when sufficiently outranged and it gains nothing for it. To summarise, the ion pistol is outperformed in almost every category. It cannot compete in DPS. It cannot compete in sustained damage. Although alpha looks promising due to the charge mechanic, it loses out to the bolt pistol because it canGÇÖt follow through with its shots. It certainly canGÇÖt compete in range. It doesnGÇÖt have the RoF to be good at CQC. The bolt pistol is not much better either (although it certainly is better) GÇô it is better than the ion pistol, but it is a distinctly lacklustre weapon. The charge time on a precision weapon will seriously hurt it. Having looked at the problems of the ion and bolt pistols, itGÇÖs time to move onto the MSMG (Magsec SMG). The MSMG is a remarkably powerful weapon for a sidearm. With the high DPS and range that it has, it actually performs very similarly in its optimal and has a similar range to the plasma rifle. It also simply outperforms the normal SMG GÇô with the much higher range and solid DPS output, the MSMG is just about hands down the best of the two SMGs as well as being a very effective weapon in its own right compared to all the other weapons. Looking at the statistics that we previously used to discuss the ion and bolt pistols: The MSMG has the best DPS in class (discounting the semi-automatic scrambler pistol and headshots). The MSMG has the second best range. The MSMG has the best damage per clip. The MSMG has a RoF high enough to allow spray and pray styles an effective boost. Sidearm Comparison Summary/TL;DR: The ion pistol is a terrible weapon. The bolt pistol is not very good. The magsec SMG is very, very powerful for a sidearm GÇô the only other sidearm that can seriously compete with it is the scrambler pistol, a weapon apparently unaffected by the TTK changes. [P3] Damage mod changes As noted earlier, the 1.8 changes are reducing the efficacy of damage mods from 3/5/10 to 3/4/5. Essentially, this is a gargantuan nerf to the complex damage modifier, a 20% tweak to the enhanced, and the standard version remains unchanged. There are two problems with this. 1. The complex damage modifier is presently balanced against complex shield extenders in terms of TTK. The difference between the two is currently marginal. After these changes, shield extenders will be the obvious choice, regardless of the tier of damage mod or extender, even with the poor scaling on the shield extender. 2. Due to the poor scaling of the new damage modifiers, nobody will use the complex damage modifier. Exactly the same effect can be observed with basic plates GÇô but the problem is arguably even greater here. LetGÇÖs elaborate on both of these. The complex damage modifier is currently equal to a complex shield extender in a 1v1 situation with the average assault variant rifle. This changes when you stack three of them due to their multiplicative effect (even with the stacking penalties), though. The reason I am comparing the damage modifier and the shield extender is because they are direct competitors for the slots. They use the same slots (high slots) and approximately the same quantities of resources (with shields taking a shade more PG and damage mods taking a little more CPU). This example holds true at both the standard levels and the prototype levels. Consider a basic Caldari frame with no core skills, but mysteriously has the ability to fit a single complex shield extender. Opposing that frame is an identical frame but with a complex damage modifier in place of the extender. They are both using a generic assault variant rifle GÇô weGÇÖll consider it element neutral for the purposes of this demonstration. The base HP of a C-1 frame is 210 shields and 120 armour, for a total of 330 HP (the ratio of shield:armour doesnGÇÖt actually matter to an element neutral weapon). With the complex shield extender, that goes up to 402 HP. Both rifles have a base DPS of 430 (about average for an assault variant rifle in 1.7). The damage modded one has a DPS of 473. It will take the extender-fit frame 0.76 seconds to kill their opponent. It will take the damage mod fit frame 0.84 seconds to kill their opponent. All other things being equal, the extender fit frame wins the fight. LetGÇÖs look at the proto level. Consider a ck.0 with four extenders vs a ck.0 with three extenders and a damage mod. The base DPS of the rifles has jumped to 470, due to the higher tier gear. The damage modded rifle now hits 517 DPS. The extender fit ck.0 has 553 shields and 150 armour, for a total of 703 HP. The damage mod fit ck.0 has 631 HP. It will take the extender-fit frame 1.34 seconds to kill their opponent. It will take the damage mod fit frame 1.36 seconds to kill their opponent. *1st Official Role Playing Gallente Asshole* -Title Awarded by True Adamance
Arkena Wyrnspire Fatal Absolution 10498	Posted - 2014.03.06 20:11:00 - [4] - Quote ThatGÇÖs closer, and the shield extender fit frame still wins out, but itGÇÖs so close we might as well consider it equal. Of course, these numbers will vary slightly (and a multi-damage modded Gallogi with 5 plates will beat out one with 2 damage mods, 1 extender and 5 plates, but only marginally GÇô and thatGÇÖs more symptomatic of the armoured Gallogi) but the point is the same. Shield extenders and complex damage modifiers are currently fairly well balanced. I would highlight the real problem with damage mod stacking as the ability to reach a point where you can gank an opponent before they can really react. ThatGÇÖs part of a low TTK. After a base damage nerf, shield extenders become even more effective in comparison. Coupled with a nerf as massive as halving the efficacy, and there is very little reason to use damage mods rather than extenders except on very specific fits. [P4] Proficiency changes Going hand in hand with the damage mod changes are the proficiency changes, in order to reduce TTK. Instead of a flat 3% per level damage bonus, itGÇÖs now a 3% per level bonus to the natural affinity of this weapon. This accentuates the natural strengths of weaponry nicely, although it possibly devalues the SP-expensive proficiency skill heavily. The problem arises when considering what will actually happen with this. A weapon with good proficiency will shred its naturally affinity very, very well. The other tank type will be like hitting a brick wall. What does this encourage? Dual tanking. With the damage mod changes, itGÇÖs much more efficient to stack HP over damage mods Would you prefer 140 HP or 10% more damage? Unless youGÇÖre a heavy or sniper, the answer is very likely to be the former. This devalues the concept of having damage types completely. ItGÇÖs not a case of carefully picking targets because your weapon is more efficient against them - itGÇÖs a case of every target being able to harden up against both damage affinities. In the case of some weapons, it also has a potentially devastating effect. For the laser rifle, scrambler rifle, and scrambler pistol shields will be utterly destroyed - 135% damage is huge. But then thereGÇÖs 80% damage to armour, and no easy way to increase that. Especially with the large armour HP pools happening at the moment, this will have a devastating impact on the weapon usage. Of course, a sidearm geared towards a different damage type could be used but that then requires a solid sidearm, which is a significant disadvantage over weapons such as the combat rifle which will struggle with neither shields nor armour. Switching takes valuable time, which can lead to death even with an increased TTK. As a result, more balanced weapons like the CR are likely to have a much easier time of things with this set of changes. [P5]Overall Effect Analysis + Predictions In the end, what we end up with are a series of changes that promote dual tanking and some weapon tweaks which donGÇÖt make sense. A number of weapons will end up falling by the wayside with these changes, and a number will reign supreme. Weapons with a higher range (possibly with the exception of the SCR, due to the terrible damage profile) will continue to dominate in the 1.8 build. If you have the same damage output and a larger range, all other things remaining equal, the longer ranged weapon will become more prevalent because it is simply better. Damage mods have become ineffective while dual tanking has essentially been buffed. As a result of this, dual tanking is very likely to become the dominant fitting style in 1.8. The proficiency changes make it very desirable to have both types of tank and the damage mod changes make it undesirable to use anything else. The damage mod changes also have the side effect of nerfing AV further. ItGÇÖs not all bad, though. In a remarkably intelligent fashion CCP appear to have pre-empted grenade spam by reducing grenade counts across the board. Grenade spam would likely have become a very powerful tactic again with the TTK increase not affecting them, but this change could help prevent that. But there are problems. There are a lot of problems. And there has been no time to give feedback on said problems. You have long since made your choice. What you make now is a mistake.
Aisha Ctarl Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 3825	Posted - 2014.03.06 20:17:00 - [5] - Quote Mhhm, yes, I see... I could list the ways how we Amarr are better than you, but your lesser mind wouldn't comprehend it.
Buster Friently Rosen Association 1926	Posted - 2014.03.06 20:18:00 - [6] - Quote Haven't read it all, but I see in your analysis of the sidearms you've left off the flaylock completely. I know, it's easy to forget, but any comprehensive analysis should include it. I'm sure it is actually the worst of them all, not the ion pistol. Damage mods have always been inferior to shields. Now more so. This also adversely affects snipers the most. Reduction in grenade span is fine, but it shouldn't affect flux or AV, but you know it will. Also, in the end, you fail to point out the most important change - longet TTK. That's pretty much the point of all the rifle nerfs.
Arkena Wyrnspire Fatal Absolution 10498	Posted - 2014.03.06 20:18:00 - [7] - Quote Aisha Ctarl wrote: Mhhm, yes, I see... This will shortly become the most +1'd post in the thread, I'm sure. You have long since made your choice. What you make now is a mistake.
Delta 749 Kestrel Reconnaissance 2594	Posted - 2014.03.06 20:23:00 - [8] - Quote Lol no life nerd In all seriousness though these changes are largely going to damage the game and have the opposite effect that those that asked for them intended IE longer TTK not increasing build diversity as they hoped but rather homogenize the builds we see on the field Thats not even touching on other aspects of game play such as ambush tactics now being severely weakened since now the enemy has ample time to run off and heal up and pushing objectives being a boring battle of attrition since again people will have ample time to take cover and heal up But hey, tanks are being left alone so some players will be happy, good job CCP I'll start my own war, with hookers, and blackjack! In fact forget the war and the blackjack.
Arkena Wyrnspire Fatal Absolution 10504	Posted - 2014.03.06 20:24:00 - [9] - Quote Delta 749 wrote: Lol no life nerd In all seriousness though these changes are largely going to damage the game and have the opposite effect that those that asked for them intended IE longer TTK not increasing build diversity as they hoped but rather homogenize the builds we see on the field Thats not even touching on other aspects of game play such as ambush tactics now being severely weakened since now the enemy has ample time to run off and heal up and pushing objectives being a boring battle of attrition since again people will have ample time to take cover and heal up But hey, tanks are being left alone so some players will be happy, good job CCP This is pretty much it. Let it be known that I am not concise and that this can function as a TL;DR with less maths. You have long since made your choice. What you make now is a mistake.
ads alt DROID EXILES General Tso's Alliance 72	Posted - 2014.03.06 20:30:00 - [10] - Quote Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: This is going to be a long thread. I would like this to be a productive discussion. Please refrain from comments such as GÇÿlol u nerdGÇÖ GÇÿu hav no life lolGÇÖ etc. At long last, weGÇÖve gotten a devblog on key changes to weaponry and modules affecting TTK. IGÇÖm sure everyone has probably seen the changes by now, but hereGÇÖs a quick summary: All rifles damage output nerfed, SMG also nerfed (12% plasma rifle, 10% scrambler rifle, 16% combat rifle, 9% assault combat rifle, 14% rail rifle, 9% SMG) Damage mods nerfed to 3%/4%/5% damage increase for standard/enhanced/complex. Proficiency skill changed from direct damage bonus to increased affinity damage (RR proficiency gives 15% bonus to armour rather than 15% to both shields and armour) Three new weapons introduced GÇô bolt pistol, magsec SMG, and ion pistol Mass drivers buffed significantly for damage Laser rifles buffed in range, scope, CQC damage, and heat build-up LetGÇÖs look at all of this in sections, and then look at the overall effect that these sweeping changes will have. [P1] Rifle comparisons [P2] Sidearm comparisons [P3] Damage mod changes [P4] Proficiency changes [P5] Overall effect analysis + predictions Firstly, letGÇÖs analyse the new stats of all the weapons. We will begin with straight DPS comparisons. Any weapon which will likely be unable to reach its maximum DPS because itGÇÖs a semi-automatic or burst weapon will be indicated with an asterisk . This excludes charge mechanics. DPS at standard: Assault plasma rifle: 375 Breach plasma rifle: 300 Burst plasma rifle: ~350 Tactical plasma rifle: 420* Scrambler rifle: 750* DPS Assault scrambler rifle: 380 DPS Combat rifle: 540* DPS Assault combat rifle: 380 DPS Rail rifle: 440 DPS Assault rail rifle: 375 DPS SMG: 350 DPS Scrambler Pistol: 530 DPS* Not including headshots Magsec SMG: 355 DPS Bolt pistol: 340 DPS Ion pistol: 310 DPS* HMG: 600 DPS What can we see from this? We can see that with the exception of the semi-automatic/burst weapons, all the DPS values are very similar for their class. The RR has significantly higher DPS than the other fully automatics, but it has a short charge time. Accounting for the charge time brings the weapon down to a similar DPS level. [P1] Rifle comparisons A very notable difference between rifles is the range profile. The plasma rifles have the shortest range, the combat rifles outranges the plasma rifle, the scrambler rifles outrange the combat rifles, and the rail rifles outrange all the other rifles. Range is, quite obviously, a significant advantage. A longer range than the opponent can offer a huge tactical edge. So naturally, if a weapon has a longer range than another, then if theyGÇÖre well balanced against each other the shorter ranged weapon will be better in another area. Here we have a set of weapons with very similar DPS stats and general operation, but varying ranges. Compare the ACR and the plasma rifle. The ACR does not fall down significantly in any major area compared to the plasma rifle. However, it beats the plasma rifle on range. I see this as a big problem. Look at the plasma assault rifle DPS. Look at the other assault weapons. There is very little DPS difference, but all of these other weapons outrange the plasma rifle. This is the case for the ASCR vs the ACR as well. The ARR isnGÇÖt as bad because of the charge time, but it too has similar DPS at a much, much greater range without any major penalties. Basic Rifle Comparison Summary/TL;DR: DPS differences between rifles are insignificant. Range differences are significant. The tradeoffs for longer range are insignificant. As a result, long range weapons are better in this model. Shorter ranged weapons should have a higher DPS from trading off range. They donGÇÖt. This should be corrected. Now letGÇÖs look at some discrepancies and silly things about the rifle class as a whole. Firstly, the plasma rifle variants. As a general rule, they are terrible. Before we start looking at each of them specifically, IGÇÖd just like to address this claim: forum myth wrote: the plasma rifles variants are knockoffs of the other rifles so they should be worse I find this statement to be completely inadequate. It is poor or lazy design to have a weapon that is simply GÇÿworseGÇÖ than others. Especially as the assault variants of the other weapons are GÇÿmimicsGÇÖ of the plasma assault rifle and yet are as good as or better than it. A prime example of the variants being bad is the breach assault rifle. Presently, it has the lowest DPS of any rifle, by a long margin. However, it is being nerfed by the same percentage as the main plasma rifle, and is being nerfed more than much stronger weapons such as the ACR. This is lazy work GÇô itGÇÖs not a case of the breach actually needing this nerf, because itGÇÖs blatantly obvious that it doesnGÇÖt. This appears to be simply a case of the breach having not been looked at as its own weapon and just hit with a blanket nerf. It is entirely unnecessary. As it happens, even with pre-nerf stats it would have the lowest DPS of any 1.8 rifle. LetGÇÖs look at the burst plasma rifle. The natural competitor to this weapon is the normal combat rifle. The two weapons, come 1.8, have exactly the same damage per shot. The combat rifle has a higher range and rate of fire, by a very significant margin. This is an example of two weapons that are not balanced against each other. The combat rifle is simply better than the burst assault rifle. How does the ARR have less dps than the rr? The assault weapons are pointless lol

Arkena Wyrnspire Fatal Absolution 10507	Posted - 2014.03.06 20:32:00 - [11] - Quote ads alt wrote: Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: -snip- How does the ARR have less dps than the rr? The assault weapons are pointless lol Why on earth would you quote all that for one line? Really? You have long since made your choice. What you make now is a mistake.
Asha Starwind DUST University Ivy League 463	Posted - 2014.03.06 20:33:00 - [12] - Quote Sgt kirk and Arkena are the same person. Would've of never thought. 32db Mad Bomber.
ads alt DROID EXILES General Tso's Alliance 72	Posted - 2014.03.06 20:34:00 - [13] - Quote Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: ads alt wrote: Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: -snip- How does the ARR have less dps than the rr? The assault weapons are pointless lol Why on earth would you quote all that for one line? Really? Idk, it baffles me, in 1.7 arr has more dps, now the ASSAULT weapons are pure garbage lol
Arkena Wyrnspire Fatal Absolution 10507	Posted - 2014.03.06 20:34:00 - [14] - Quote Asha Starwind wrote: Sgt kirk and Arkena are the same person. Would've of never thought. I am the lord of the forums. I am also Cat Merc. You have long since made your choice. What you make now is a mistake.
InsidiousN KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 168	Posted - 2014.03.06 20:46:00 - [15] - Quote The problem with the way CCP operates and iterates is that threads like this (among many others) point out the VERY OBVIOUS flaws with the changes CCP will be making (such as creating Heavy & Tank Spam 514), however, the stat changes in Dev blog CCP released, and any other changes that will be announced in the patch notes are FINAL upon release of the blog and patch notes. Even though most of the community clearly sees the **** writing on the wall, CCP has already finalized these changes and we will all have to live for the next 3+ months with the garbage we clearly spotted from miles away. CCP, release your ideas for patches earlier, and when you do make them open for change and not written in stone. This 1.8 update will create Heavy and Tank Spam 514, numerous people clearly see it now and will be correctly saying and lamenting "I told you so" for many months until the next big update mistake you create. However you are too stubborn, or dickish, or some awful combination of both to understand your mistakes and fix them, rather than make your customer base live with those mistakes for months or years.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 7935	Posted - 2014.03.06 20:48:00 - [16] - Quote Very well said, and as always your examples, statistics and such put all the weapons into context. I would agree with your predictions for the most part, and would support buffs to Gallentean weapons as they have been underperforming for sometime. "War is not hell, far from it. War is beautiful. War is divine." - Grand Admiral Mekioth Sarum
Iron Wolf Saber Den of Swords 13263	Posted - 2014.03.06 20:57:00 - [17] - Quote /tags Also I am also Nova Knife. CPM 0 Secretary Omni-Soldier, Forum Warrior, Annoying Artist \\= Advanced Caldari Assault // Unlocked
Yagihige Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation 582	Posted - 2014.03.06 20:59:00 - [18] - Quote Hmm... How about if we'd split damage mods and thus create a split? What i mean is, instead of having just damage mods, we could have shield damage mods and armor damage mods. You'd have a few combinations you could do with these. You could either opt to increase the damage your weapon does to its natural affinity or you could balance your weapon's damage to try and mitigate the lesser damage your weapon does naturally to the opposite affinity. One type of damage mod would go on high slots and the other on low slots. em ta kool t'nod
Arkena Wyrnspire Fatal Absolution 10514	Posted - 2014.03.06 21:01:00 - [19] - Quote Yagihige wrote: Hmm... How about if we'd split damage mods and thus create a split? What i mean is, instead of having just damage mods, we could have shield damage mods and armor damage mods. You'd have a few combinations you could do with these. You could either opt to increase the damage your weapon does to its natural affinity or you could balance your weapon's damage to try and mitigate the lesser damage your weapon does naturally to the opposite affinity. One type of damage mod would go on high slots and the other on low slots. A decent enough idea, but it simply wouldn't work with 5% modifiers. At 10%, it might actually be quite interesting. You have long since made your choice. What you make now is a mistake.
Beck Weathers Ghosts of Dawn General Tso's Alliance 663	Posted - 2014.03.06 21:04:00 - [20] - Quote Why flaylock WHY!? But at least when i skill into the Ion pistol and know it sucks i will still be able to depend on it for getting a kill unlike the fail-lock. oh and dat complex damage mod, died before its time. These forums must be located in the Californin country side, there is whine as far as the eye can see.

Arkena Wyrnspire Fatal Absolution 10515	Posted - 2014.03.06 21:06:00 - [21] - Quote Beck Weathers wrote: Why flaylock WHY!? But at least when i skill into the Ion pistol and know it sucks i will still be able to depend on it for getting a kill unlike the fail-lock. oh and dat complex damage mod, died before its time. Sad fact - the flaylock will outDPS the breach assault rifle... on splash damage. You have long since made your choice. What you make now is a mistake.
Heimdallr69 Ancient Ecchi 1781	Posted - 2014.03.06 21:10:00 - [22] - Quote Soo the combat rifle will be good? I don't mean to question your math cuz mine is terrible but it's nearly 1.5x the other rifles? That's insane. Maybe. Removed inappropriate content - CCP Logibro
Beck Weathers Ghosts of Dawn General Tso's Alliance 663	Posted - 2014.03.06 21:12:00 - [23] - Quote Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: Beck Weathers wrote: Why flaylock WHY!? But at least when i skill into the Ion pistol and know it sucks i will still be able to depend on it for getting a kill unlike the fail-lock. oh and dat complex damage mod, died before its time. Sad fact - the flaylock will outDPS the breach assault rifle... on splash damage. is that incorperating the flaylocks reload time because it has to relaod quite often before the BAR has to These forums must be located in the Californin country side, there is whine as far as the eye can see.
Arkena Wyrnspire Fatal Absolution 10515	Posted - 2014.03.06 21:13:00 - [24] - Quote Heimdallr69 wrote: Soo the combat rifle will be good? I don't mean to question your math cuz mine is terrible but it's nearly 1.5x the other rifles? That's insane. Maybe. That's with the burst fire mode, though. It's a paper statistic that assumes you're maxing out the fire rate (which isn't impossible, but it's a pain nonetheless). It's still going to be a solid weapon with the proficiency changes though. The lessened disadvantage against shields will help in an era of dual tanking. Beck Weathers wrote: Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: Beck Weathers wrote: Why flaylock WHY!? But at least when i skill into the Ion pistol and know it sucks i will still be able to depend on it for getting a kill unlike the fail-lock. oh and dat complex damage mod, died before its time. Sad fact - the flaylock will outDPS the breach assault rifle... on splash damage. is that incorperating the flaylocks reload time because it has to relaod quite often before the BAR has to No. It's a paper statistic that doesn't mean much. The BAR is useless. The flaylock is useless. Really, that's all we need to know at this point. You have long since made your choice. What you make now is a mistake.
Iron Wolf Saber Den of Swords 13263	Posted - 2014.03.06 21:18:00 - [25] - Quote Going to include possible tech 2 suit users? CPM 0 Secretary Omni-Soldier, Forum Warrior, Annoying Artist \\= Advanced Caldari Assault // Unlocked
Deviant Alt Nos Nothi 25	Posted - 2014.03.06 21:19:00 - [26] - Quote Why are you using outdated information? Or why are you comparing near proto magsec numbers to std versions of others sidearms? In case you didn't know it got nerfed, none of the magsec variants have 35 damage std 32 adv 33.6 pro 35.2 Oswald Rehnquist
Arkena Wyrnspire Fatal Absolution 10523	Posted - 2014.03.06 21:20:00 - [27] - Quote Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Going to include possible tech 2 suit users? I'm not quite sure what you mean. Do you mean a TTK example with assaults rather than medframes, or something else? If that's what you meant, then it doesn't make much of a difference. I'm happy to do more calculations if you'd like them, but I'm afraid I'm not sure what you're asking for. Deviant Alt wrote: Why are you using outdated information? Or why are you comparing near proto magsec numbers to std versions of others sidearms? In case you didn't know it got nerfed, none of the magsec variants have 35 damage std 32 adv 33.6 pro 35.2 Corrected for the two parts where this was mistakenly using old data. My apologies, thanks for pointing that out! The majority of it was using correct data, though, and the conclusions remain the same. You have long since made your choice. What you make now is a mistake.
Iron Wolf Saber Den of Swords 13264	Posted - 2014.03.06 21:22:00 - [28] - Quote Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Going to include possible tech 2 suit users? I'm not quite sure what you mean. Do you mean a TTK example with assaults rather than medframes, or something else? If that's what you meant, then it doesn't make much of a difference. I'm happy to do more calculations if you'd like them, but I'm afraid I'm not sure what you're asking for. I mean the assault minmatar gets a magazine bonus the amarr gets a heat bonus; I would say the most immeasurable results would be the plasma weapon handling with the gal assault though. There is also the commando bonuses which would nearly inching back closer to the old 1.7 dps values at max level so that is something to consider as well. CPM 0 Secretary Omni-Soldier, Forum Warrior, Annoying Artist \\= Advanced Caldari Assault // Unlocked
TechMechMeds SWAMPERIUM 2796	Posted - 2014.03.06 21:23:00 - [29] - Quote Riverdance 514 in 1.8, maybe some killing lol. Level 2 forum warrior. Dust on the ps4 asap please I sold my family to the Amarr for isk, its a valid tactic
Arkena Wyrnspire Fatal Absolution 10523	Posted - 2014.03.06 21:25:00 - [30] - Quote Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Going to include possible tech 2 suit users? I'm not quite sure what you mean. Do you mean a TTK example with assaults rather than medframes, or something else? If that's what you meant, then it doesn't make much of a difference. I'm happy to do more calculations if you'd like them, but I'm afraid I'm not sure what you're asking for. I mean the assault minmatar gets a magazine bonus the amarr gets a heat bonus; I would say the most immeasurable results would be the plasma weapon handling with the gal assault though. I don't think any of the bonuses are going to change what I looked at here significantly. Mostly it wasn't looking at sustained damage, and three of those bonuses relate to that and the Gallassault bonus doesn't appear to be hugely useful. Overheating has a huge effect on the SCR, but in terms of TTK it should still be capable of dispatching opponents before overheating with the exception of heavies and some brick tankers. CR clip size is large enough to kill most targets in a single clip, though again heavies will be an exception. RR reload speed... is a terrible bonus. Plasma rifle dispersion isn't bad, but it doesn't really appear to have a serious effect on TTK and it's something that as you rightly pointed out can't be measured or calculated very easily. You have long since made your choice. What you make now is a mistake.

Deviant Alt Nos Nothi 25	Posted - 2014.03.06 21:27:00 - [31] - Quote Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: Corrected for the two parts where this was mistakenly using old data. My apologies, thanks for pointing that out! The majority of it was using correct data, though, and the conclusions remain the same. cool, I was enjoying the read and when I saw that bit it threw me off. Oswald Rehnquist
Heimdallr69 Ancient Ecchi 1781	Posted - 2014.03.06 21:27:00 - [32] - Quote Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: Heimdallr69 wrote: Soo the combat rifle will be good? I don't mean to question your math cuz mine is terrible but it's nearly 1.5x the other rifles? That's insane. Maybe. That's with the burst fire mode, though. It's a paper statistic that assumes you're maxing out the fire rate (which isn't impossible, but it's a pain nonetheless). It's still going to be a solid weapon with the proficiency changes though. The lessened disadvantage against shields will help in an era of dual tanking. Beck Weathers wrote: Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: Beck Weathers wrote: Why flaylock WHY!? But at least when i skill into the Ion pistol and know it sucks i will still be able to depend on it for getting a kill unlike the fail-lock. oh and dat complex damage mod, died before its time. Sad fact - the flaylock will outDPS the breach assault rifle... on splash damage. is that incorperating the flaylocks reload time because it has to relaod quite often before the BAR has to No. It's a paper statistic that doesn't mean much. The BAR is useless. The flaylock is useless. Really, that's all we need to know at this point. Thanks for the answer, makes since to me now. Removed inappropriate content - CCP Logibro
Cat Merc Ahrendee Mercenaries General Tso's Alliance 7175	Posted - 2014.03.06 21:30:00 - [33] - Quote Excellent post. That's where my frustration lies, though I didn't write an over 10k words threadnaught to explain it Shield regeneration bonus for Gallente Assault is about as useful as Sharpshooter for Nova Knives. DUST514514
RINON114 B.S.A.A. General Tso's Alliance 532	Posted - 2014.03.06 21:39:00 - [34] - Quote Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: Yagihige wrote: Hmm... How about if we'd split damage mods and thus create a split? What i mean is, instead of having just damage mods, we could have shield damage mods and armor damage mods. You'd have a few combinations you could do with these. You could either opt to increase the damage your weapon does to its natural affinity or you could balance your weapon's damage to try and mitigate the lesser damage your weapon does naturally to the opposite affinity. One type of damage mod would go on high slots and the other on low slots. A decent enough idea, but it simply wouldn't work with 5% modifiers. At 10%, it might actually be quite interesting. I actually love both of you. Hold me.
Reav Hannari Red Rock Outriders 3136	Posted - 2014.03.06 21:42:00 - [35] - Quote I honestly can't figure out why CCP fails to understand that short range weapons should dominate in their range while long range weapons need to stand off and slowly chip away at their targets. I don't think they have even looked at the Assault Rifle variants since they were originally designed other than gutting the Tactical. // Lance Commander // Matari Logistics / Scout / Pilot // @ReesNoturana
Ansiiis The Engineer Mocking Bird Inc. 0	Posted - 2014.03.06 21:46:00 - [36] - Quote Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: Asha Starwind wrote: Sgt kirk and Arkena are the same person. Would've of never thought. I am the lord of the forums. I am also Cat Merc. Lies! Cat Merc's cub-bearer.
Ansiiis The Trustworthy Mocking Bird Inc. 759	Posted - 2014.03.06 21:48:00 - [37] - Quote Ansiiis The Engineer wrote: Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: Asha Starwind wrote: Sgt kirk and Arkena are the same person. Would've of never thought. I am the lord of the forums. I am also Cat Merc. Lies! yes, yes. But on a serious note - I read it all and I didn't find a spot to disagree except where you mentioned that shield extenders are fairly balanced to damage mods. I did understand that you emphasized that people would go for dual tanking but still - damage mods should not have touched. Caldari are masters of hand to hand combat.
Zahle Undt Bullet Cluster Legacy Rising 816	Posted - 2014.03.06 21:51:00 - [38] - Quote See I like your threadnaughts filled with maths more than sarcasm I can't pick out in text. If you are still itching to do the hardcore analysis I would like to see the HMG thrown into the mix and I would love for someone to be able to quantify how much TTK will be effected by frame type. I have the gut feeling that TTK will increase by frame IE light frames will see smallest increase, followed by medium, and then heavy frame. However, I suspect that instead of seeing a similar increase when one goes from light to heavy we would see that the increase in TTK from medium to heavy might be double the increase we see from light to medium, but I am not math savvy enough to pull off those calculations. Most tankers are like sand people. They frighten easily, but will quickly return...and in greater numbers.
Arkena Wyrnspire Fatal Absolution 10553	Posted - 2014.03.06 21:51:00 - [39] - Quote Ansiiis The Trustworthy wrote: Ansiiis The Engineer wrote: Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: Asha Starwind wrote: Sgt kirk and Arkena are the same person. Would've of never thought. I am the lord of the forums. I am also Cat Merc. Lies! yes, yes. But on a serious note - I read it all and I didn't find a spot to disagree except where you mentioned that shield extenders are fairly balanced to damage mods. I did understand that you emphasized that people would go for dual tanking but still - damage mods should not have touched. Yeah, what I meant is that they're balanced against shield extenders RIGHT NOW. It's okay at the moment. Those examples were meant to show that it was fine at the moment. After a damage mod nerf, dual tanking is the only way to go and I see that as a bad thing. You have long since made your choice. What you make now is a mistake.
Ansiiis The Trustworthy Mocking Bird Inc. 760	Posted - 2014.03.06 21:52:00 - [40] - Quote Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: Ansiiis The Trustworthy wrote: Ansiiis The Engineer wrote: Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: Asha Starwind wrote: Sgt kirk and Arkena are the same person. Would've of never thought. I am the lord of the forums. I am also Cat Merc. Lies! yes, yes. But on a serious note - I read it all and I didn't find a spot to disagree except where you mentioned that shield extenders are fairly balanced to damage mods. I did understand that you emphasized that people would go for dual tanking but still - damage mods should not have touched. Yeah, what I meant is that they're balanced against shield extenders RIGHT NOW. It's okay at the moment. Those examples were meant to show that it was fine at the moment. After a damage mod nerf, dual tanking is the only way to go and I see that as a bad thing. I am sorry. The research paper was too long for my simple peasant brain. Caldari are masters of hand to hand combat.

Arkena Wyrnspire Fatal Absolution 10558	Posted - 2014.03.06 21:58:00 - [41] - Quote Zahle Undt wrote: See I like your threadnaughts filled with maths more than sarcasm I can't pick out in text. If you are still itching to do the hardcore analysis I would like to see the HMG thrown into the mix and I would love for someone to be able to quantify how much TTK will be effected by frame type. I have the gut feeling that TTK will increase by frame IE light frames will see smallest increase, followed by medium, and then heavy frame. However, I suspect that instead of seeing a similar increase when one goes from light to heavy we would see that the increase in TTK from medium to heavy might be double the increase we see from light to medium, but I am not math savvy enough to pull off those calculations. I was planning on doing the HMG but I was concerned that the thread would devolve into a heavies vs non-heavies thread quickly, as the conclusion I would have drawn is that untouched it's easily going to be a dominant weapon in 1.8. As it happens, in terms of TTK jump between frames: Light --> Medium is not a very large jump, except with heavily tanked logis. Medium --> Heavy is a much larger jump after 1.8, especially because of the resistance bonuses. Don't discount the TTK changes on the light frames just because they're light. Tanking modules have the same efficacy on any frame - I believe you're a heavy, and you may have noticed this if you've ever tried to put on shield extenders. Shield extenders feel fairly low power compared to heavy HP pools. The same effect can be seen with light frames, but in reverse - they benefit massively from individual HP modules. I'll have a bit more of a look at heavies later. You have long since made your choice. What you make now is a mistake.
mollerz 2653	Posted - 2014.03.06 22:11:00 - [42] - Quote Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: ads alt wrote: Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: -snip- How does the ARR have less dps than the rr? The assault weapons are pointless lol Why on earth would you quote all that for one line? Really? Because: He is a moron. Thanks for doing this analysis. You gotta hustle if you wanna make a dolla
Cat Merc Ahrendee Mercenaries General Tso's Alliance 7179	Posted - 2014.03.06 22:23:00 - [43] - Quote Ansiiis The Engineer wrote: Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: Asha Starwind wrote: Sgt kirk and Arkena are the same person. Would've of never thought. I am the lord of the forums. I am also Cat Merc. Lies! He's not lying. Shield regeneration bonus for Gallente Assault is about as useful as Sharpshooter for Nova Knives. DUST514514
Cat Merc Ahrendee Mercenaries General Tso's Alliance 7179	Posted - 2014.03.06 22:25:00 - [44] - Quote Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: Asha Starwind wrote: Sgt kirk and Arkena are the same person. Would've of never thought. I am the lord of the forums. I am also Cat Merc. This would explain why we always think the same thing! IT'S A CONSPIRACY! Shield regeneration bonus for Gallente Assault is about as useful as Sharpshooter for Nova Knives. DUST514514
darkiller240 WarRavens League of Infamy 532	Posted - 2014.03.06 22:30:00 - [45] - Quote Combat rifle has recoil Burst plasma rifle does not there balance "Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." - Albert Einstein
Arkena Wyrnspire Fatal Absolution 10562	Posted - 2014.03.06 22:33:00 - [46] - Quote darkiller240 wrote: Combat rifle has recoil Burst plasma rifle does not there balance Except the combat recoil is completely laughable and the burst plasma rifle still has it. The only reason you're not noticing it on the plasma variant is because the RoF is so slow in comparison. You have long since made your choice. What you make now is a mistake.
Zahle Undt Bullet Cluster Legacy Rising 818	Posted - 2014.03.06 23:15:00 - [47] - Quote Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: Zahle Undt wrote: See I like your threadnaughts filled with maths more than sarcasm I can't pick out in text. If you are still itching to do the hardcore analysis I would like to see the HMG thrown into the mix and I would love for someone to be able to quantify how much TTK will be effected by frame type. I have the gut feeling that TTK will increase by frame IE light frames will see smallest increase, followed by medium, and then heavy frame. However, I suspect that instead of seeing a similar increase when one goes from light to heavy we would see that the increase in TTK from medium to heavy might be double the increase we see from light to medium, but I am not math savvy enough to pull off those calculations. I was planning on doing the HMG but I was concerned that the thread would devolve into a heavies vs non-heavies thread quickly, as the conclusion I would have drawn is that untouched it's easily going to be a dominant weapon in 1.8. As it happens, in terms of TTK jump between frames: Light --> Medium is not a very large jump, except with heavily tanked logis. Medium --> Heavy is a much larger jump after 1.8, especially because of the resistance bonuses. Don't discount the TTK changes on the light frames just because they're light. Tanking modules have the same efficacy on any frame - I believe you're a heavy, and you may have noticed this if you've ever tried to put on shield extenders. Shield extenders feel fairly low power compared to heavy HP pools. The same effect can be seen with light frames, but in reverse - they benefit massively from individual HP modules. I'll have a bit more of a look at heavies later. I'm a dual tanking Gal/Amarr logi on one character and Gal scout/Min assault on another. Extenders are definitely UP compared to armor now. The funny thing is, I just skilled into Damage mods on each of my chars because my friends were saying I was silly to tank shield extenders and now things are going the other way. Oh well, here's hoping for a respec. Thanks for doing the number crunching, I won't be very surprised if light to medium TTK jump isn't very large. Last I ran the numbers I'm going to be able to build a gal scout with only about 100 less EHP than my most well tanked min assault. I think CCP did their new sentinel bonuses with current light weapons in mind and then didn't have time or didn't think to revisit them after nerfing the weapons and quite I think its going to be sentinel spam in 1.8 followed by over nerfs and people crying for another respec in 1.9. Its CCPs MO Most tankers are like sand people. They frighten easily, but will quickly return...and in greater numbers.
Yagihige Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation 583	Posted - 2014.03.06 23:34:00 - [48] - Quote Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: Yagihige wrote: Hmm... How about if we'd split damage mods and thus create a split? What i mean is, instead of having just damage mods, we could have shield damage mods and armor damage mods. You'd have a few combinations you could do with these. You could either opt to increase the damage your weapon does to its natural affinity or you could balance your weapon's damage to try and mitigate the lesser damage your weapon does naturally to the opposite affinity. One type of damage mod would go on high slots and the other on low slots. A decent enough idea, but it simply wouldn't work with 5% modifiers. At 10%, it might actually be quite interesting. I left any numbers out of my idea. That would be a decision to be made afterwards. Eitherway, something like this could mean could even focus on dmg mods both on high and low slots creating the ultimate glassjaw fit or escape the current dilemma of having to think of damage mods only in competition with shield extenders/regulators. You could shield tank and still use damage mods or viceversa. You'd just need to take in account what weapon you'd be carrying and what effect you'd want to put into it; an exacerbator of its damage bonus or an equalizer to balance damage output by your weapon. em ta kool t'nod
Vulcanus Lightbringer Eyniletti Rangers Minmatar Republic 317	Posted - 2014.03.06 23:38:00 - [49] - Quote Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: But there are problems. There are a lot of problems. And there has been no time to give feedback on said problems. Which is exactly why we need to see dev blogs and/or patch notes much sooner than we currently do!!
Meeko Fent Kirkinen Risk Control Caldari State 1923	Posted - 2014.03.06 23:49:00 - [50] - Quote Ahh, so THATS who Sgt Kirk's alt is. Or who Sgt Kirk's an Alt of. Whatever. Yes, we know the other guns needed to be nerfed harder, we know... And we know that the Ion Pistol us UP, Yes... Sorry, thats really all that need be written. Not this HUGE mess.... Its important to to let CCP know for sure... But this was a little overkill Arkena/Kirk. Because you Wanted to be Something your Not.

Doshneil Antaro Dem Durrty Boyz Renegade Alliance 223	Posted - 2014.03.06 23:51:00 - [51] - Quote The OP post is well thought out, and was a pleasant read. Most of the ideas are sound, but are not without some flaws. You brought up some good points about how damage mods will now be way more inferior to shields due to longer TTK in 1.8. Vs the same suit, your tank should be the deciding factor though, not by damage mods. Choosing which way you tank should have meaning, but with high damage mods, it is hard to truely gauge what weapons are OP and which are UP. As I have pointed out in the past, biotics should be shared H/L slot modules. This would lead to diverse fittings, and a generally funner game. Proficiency changes are also very much needed. Being able to max a prof and then using STD weapons with higher damage outputs than a player with an advanced weapon and less prof or none is mind boggling to me. Adding the bonus to the weapons natural shield or armor bonus makes choosing the right weapon for your choosen playstyle more rewarding. TBC.....Do not crucify me yet till my next comment....... Sage /thread
mollerz 2661	Posted - 2014.03.06 23:52:00 - [52] - Quote Meeko Fent wrote: Sorry, thats really all that need be written. Not this HUGE mess.... Its important to to let CCP know for sure... But this was a little overkill Arkena/Kirk. ** poor opinions are poor. Pour your ** elsewhere pisser. say that ten times really fast instead of reading it then You gotta hustle if you wanna make a dolla
Doshneil Antaro Dem Durrty Boyz Renegade Alliance 223	Posted - 2014.03.07 00:03:00 - [53] - Quote (read my previous post first) This will lead to some huge imbalances of course. That is kind of where we need to be. To attain balance, we have to strip down excessive damage boosts so we can get real numbers that matter. I personally believe that with these changes, dropsuit armor and shield values will have to be reworked to compensate for weapons being great and popping shields but tickle armor (and visa versa). Shield tankers would need a boost to to shields, while having armor further reduced. Armor less shields more armor. This allows shield tankers and armor tankers forced to rely mainly on their choosen tank, but does not prevent them from buffering with their weak one. This would allow shield weapons to finish off shield users armor quickly, but also give you a panick moments when facing an armor user. This also makes choosing the right sidearm and grenade important. Bring only vs armor weapons vs a shield user will bad and is a risk, but that makes the choice that much more important and fun Sage /thread
Meeko Fent Kirkinen Risk Control Caldari State 1924	Posted - 2014.03.07 00:17:00 - [54] - Quote mollerz wrote: Meeko Fent wrote: Sorry, thats really all that need be written. Not this HUGE mess.... Its important to to let CCP know for sure... But this was a little overkill Arkena/Kirk. ** poor opinions are poor. Pour your ** elsewhere pisser. say that ten times really fast instead of reading it then And you yourself. Its pretty much exactly what it says. Why did him/her/cat have to make it so long? I'm merely paraphrasing it. Because you Wanted to be Something your Not.
Kierkegaard Soren Forsaken Immortals Top Men. 247	Posted - 2014.03.07 00:52:00 - [55] - Quote You always make solid posts. Great read, and I agree which your analysis. The sad thing is, I was hoping the weapon rebalance would be a big step forward towards me actually enjoying the game. But what I'm reading here is that the RR will continue to dominate and the Gallente are garbage. Dedicated Commando. "He who can destroy a thing, controls a thing." -Paul Atreides.
Scheneighnay McBob Learning Coalition College 4221	Posted - 2014.03.07 01:42:00 - [56] - Quote Too lazy to check if you mentioned it, but SMGs may still have higher DPS than magsec SMGs: SMGs: 95% shield damage 110% armor damage Magsec: 90% shield damage 110% armor damage I am your scan error.
Sgt Kirk Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 4906	Posted - 2014.03.07 02:27:00 - [57] - Quote Asha Starwind wrote: Sgt kirk and Arkena are the same person. Would've of never thought. its more like we're alter egos of each other. He's the respectful, calm reserved side and I'm the *****, spontaneous opinionated side. meanwhile cat merc is the ego that can't quite make it. 1st Official Role Playing Gallente Asshole** -Title Awarded by True Adamance
CommanderBolt ACME SPECIAL FORCES RISE of LEGION 956	Posted - 2014.03.07 02:48:00 - [58] - Quote Great thread Arkena. I think anyone looking at 1.8 with a rational mindset can already see the problems we are going to face. I say this all the time and I hate to be a 'negative Nancy' however I honestly feel these changes were really ill thought out and certainly not balanced. Where is the CPM in all of this? Were they reviewing this information before hand or have they only just found out themselves? I want DUST 514 to succeed but time after time I really feel like CCP are just digging them selves a hole to sit in. They talk the good talk but when it comes time to look at actual stats'n'changes, they fall flat and certainly fall far from expectations. The details and stats can still be changed, right? Right CCP? Join our public channel - ACME SPECIAL FORCES PUB For the STATE!
Dagger-Two Tharumec Villore Accords 245	Posted - 2014.03.07 03:09:00 - [59] - Quote And here I thought Arkena was also Adamance.... Pretty much everything you said here was right on the money. These are all weapon changes I have been waiting to see happen, and every new release that doesn't include them kills my desire to keep playing that much more. Edit: Please, SOMEONE from CCP please take notice of this thread and take these weapon suggestions to the discussion table. They are genuinely GOOD ideas to put the weapons where they need to be once and for all, without this 'buff this, nerf that' nonsense. Among all the garbage floating around on these forums, this one thread is among the few shining jewels Playing since 1st batch of closed beta keys.
Spectre-M The Generals General Tso's Alliance 328	Posted - 2014.03.07 03:27:00 - [60] - Quote Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: Asha Starwind wrote: Sgt kirk and Arkena are the same person. Would've of never thought. I am the lord of the forums. I am also Cat Merc. <-- it says bear, but that is totally one cool cat. Amarr Factional Warfare Loyalist Minnmatar in Amarr Armor I am a Wolf in Sheeps Clothing

True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 7960	Posted - 2014.03.07 03:33:00 - [61] - Quote Spectre-M wrote: Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: Asha Starwind wrote: Sgt kirk and Arkena are the same person. Would've of never thought. I am the lord of the forums. I am also Cat Merc. <-- it says bear, but that is totally one cool cat. NO! NO! ARKENA IS JUST CATMERC! NOT SGT KIRK! "War is not hell, far from it. War is beautiful. War is divine." - Grand Admiral Mekioth Sarum
Zeylon Rho Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 3766	Posted - 2014.03.07 03:42:00 - [62] - Quote Good post, Arkena. I'm a big supporter of lengthening TTK, but this wasn't exactly how I saw them doing it. You sized up the problems pretty well I think. I find the proficiency changes most vexing from the standpoint of either making a weapon mostly ineffective for half of its damage (lasers, etc.) or forcing people to carry a weapon of another profile (oddly forcing cross-racial use). The damage mod changes are steep as well. I thought they'd be changing how they stacked or making them damage type specific, not cutting them in half. Dren and Templar equipment stats, wrong since release.
BL4CKST4R WarRavens League of Infamy 1986	Posted - 2014.03.07 04:00:00 - [63] - Quote And this is why I will be running Militia suits in 1.8, 1.9 is going to be one hell of a patch. I wouldn't mind how terrible 1.8 is if CCP actually did hotfixesm But they always wait until the next patch to fix things and unfortunately 1 month is way to long. For the Federation!
BL4CKST4R WarRavens League of Infamy 1986	Posted - 2014.03.07 04:05:00 - [64] - Quote CommanderBolt wrote: Great thread Arkena. I think anyone looking at 1.8 with a rational mindset can already see the problems we are going to face. I say this all the time and I hate to be a 'negative Nancy' however I honestly feel these changes were really ill thought out and certainly not balanced. Where is the CPM in all of this? Were they reviewing this information before hand or have they only just found out themselves? I want DUST 514 to succeed but time after time I really feel like CCP are just digging them selves a hole to sit in. They talk the good talk but when it comes time to look at actual stats'n'changes, they fall flat and certainly fall far from expectations. The details and stats can still be changed, right? Right CCP? Maybe once the dev blogs roll out its to late. For the Federation!
Dagger-Two Tharumec Villore Accords 246	Posted - 2014.03.07 05:08:00 - [65] - Quote Bumping this mercilessly because it is a shining gem in a sea of poop Playing since 1st batch of closed beta keys.
Arkena Wyrnspire Fatal Absolution 10612	Posted - 2014.03.07 07:20:00 - [66] - Quote Dagger-Two wrote: Plasma rifle doing the highest overall damage of the full-auto weapons, with close to zero falloff range. Also would be nice to see : RR get a bit of a rate-of-fire decrease on both variants in exchange for a moderately more optimal and falloff range Scrambler rifles get a little more optimal range, with a little less maximum range Burst combat rifle get a slight increase in time between bursts as well as a small optimal range reduction for both variants, in exchange for a large increase in falloff distance for both variants. Just my opinions And what solid opinions they are. I agree with pretty much all of this. Something I'm very keen on is role definition of weapons - so every weapon has their place where they're excellent, and a place where they're definitely outperformed by other things. The current style of homogeneity with the odd range tweak isn't working very well. You have long since made your choice. What you make now is a mistake.
Kaughst Nyain San Renegade Alliance 236	Posted - 2014.03.07 08:05:00 - [67] - Quote I am going to be a little off topic but I do not know if I understand when people say that the reduction in damage mods reduces the 'diversity' to simply switch to dual tank, that makes it sound as if the low TTK was not a problem and subject of dual tanking was not a issue further to be reiterated on in the future anyway as the case currently with weapons have being pushed into their damage properties. "That is not how you say my name." "How do you say your name?" "I don't know but that is not how you say it."
Justicar Karnellia Ikomari-Onu Enforcement Caldari State 741	Posted - 2014.03.07 08:49:00 - [68] - Quote Good thorough post which encompasses most of the issues. I think you forgot to point out that there are other knock on effects to AV - they typically only stack damage mods in the high slots - this has a huge effect on forge gunners, which remain one of the few reliable AV fits. Lowering the grenade count punishes these fits more, and makes them even less effective than they were in the first place. One other effect is it will be like after uprising where because of the high TTK, there will be less kills, more assists, which has a knock on effect - more assists means less WP per match, means more grinding and less overall satisfaction. Also, the HMG hasn't been nerfed in line with all the other rifles, which will enhance it even more. Totally agree that they should be releasing this information far earlier than just a few weeks before the patch hits. They should also try modifying things incrementally thatn broad sweeping changes. Anyway, lots of things to work on CCP-side.
Grimmiers 0uter.Heaven 434	Posted - 2014.03.07 08:55:00 - [69] - Quote I wish they would just give the Gar the balac's rof. At 30 damage it does 428 dps which would make it the ideal close range weapon. Maybe ccp should give it a militia clip size of 48 to reduce it's overall effectiveness and promote using it within it's short range. SoundCloud Recruiter Link Pronounced Grim-e-urs
Korvin Lomont United Pwnage Service RISE of LEGION 655	Posted - 2014.03.07 09:19:00 - [70] - Quote Buster Friently wrote: Haven't read it all, but I see in your analysis of the sidearms you've left off the flaylock completely. I know, it's easy to forget, but any comprehensive analysis should include it. I'm sure it is actually the worst of them all, not the ion pistol. Damage mods have always been inferior to shields. Now more so. This also adversely affects snipers the most. Reduction in grenade spam is fine, but it shouldn't affect flux or AV, but you know it will. Also, in the end, you fail to point out the most important change - longet TTK. That's pretty much the point of all the rifle nerfs. He mentioned that he left the Flaylock because it works completely different (no hit scan). But based on my numbers (165 direct damage and 125 RoF) the Flaylock will have a DPS of 343 (more than the ION Pistol) but only 495 damage per clip (unless you go minmatar assault ) but it has of course still 140 HO Splash damage... So in general I would say its similar useless than the ION pistol

Korvin Lomont United Pwnage Service RISE of LEGION 655	Posted - 2014.03.07 09:27:00 - [71] - Quote darkiller240 wrote: Combat rifle has recoil Burst plasma rifle does not there balance The combat Rifle has little to no recoil and the last time I used the burst it had quite noticeable Recoil...but both weapon get the same reduction to this "drawback"
MINA Longstrike 2Shitz 1Giggle United Brotherhood Alliance 342	Posted - 2014.03.07 09:30:00 - [72] - Quote While I agree that currently proficiency and complex damage mods (3x) roughly cause a weapon to be 40-50% better than a non proficiency / damage modded version I think that these changes will largely hurt most of the weapons in a game. Proficiency operating solely along weapon profiles will turn it into an extreme sp sink that is honestly quite useless for most weapons and in many ways devalues it completely, if I am to spend 2mil sp on a skill that is supposed to make my weapon better all the time it should make my weapon better all the time, not 'congrats you ate through his 600 shields in 1/4 of a second LR user, its a damn shame the cal/min heavy is just gunna tuck into cover because it'll take you an overheat to get through his armor. I'd be greatly in favor of giving hybrids and projectiles +2% profile dmg / level & +1% off profile dmg / level. With lasers/scramblers because their penalty to armor is so severe I would be greatly in favor of giving them +2% off profile dmg / per level and +1% profile dmg / level. And while I do want to see TTK go up I don't want to see it happen by damage mods / skills being made worthless - that kills build diversity, dmg mods need to be at 3-5-7 for bsc/adv/pro, as it will make fitting them still be worthwhile for oh so many weapons.
Korvin Lomont United Pwnage Service RISE of LEGION 655	Posted - 2014.03.07 09:35:00 - [73] - Quote Dagger-Two wrote: And here I thought Arkena was also Adamance.... Pretty much everything you said here was right on the money. These are all weapon changes I have been waiting to see happen, and every new release that doesn't include them kills my desire to keep playing that much more. Edit: Please, SOMEONE from CCP please take notice of this thread and take these weapon suggestions to the discussion table. They are genuinely GOOD ideas to put the weapons where they need to be once and for all, without this 'buff this, nerf that' nonsense. Among all the garbage floating around on these forums, this one thread is among the few shining jewels I highly doubt this will ever happen. All the problems he pointed out (apart from the proficiency and damage mod changes) have been obvious since 1.7 (even pre since we get the first batch of numbers on the new rifles). And we told them in numerous threads. And now lokk how CCP handled that feedback instead of solving any of the issues the new rifles caused they made things even worse in some aspects (Tac vs SCR and MagSec vs AR) and solved nothing.
MINA Longstrike 2Shitz 1Giggle United Brotherhood Alliance 342	Posted - 2014.03.07 09:36:00 - [74] - Quote TechMechMeds wrote: Riverdance 514 in 1.8, maybe some killing lol. Cal sentinel + hmg 514. Assaults won't stand a chance.
MINA Longstrike 2Shitz 1Giggle United Brotherhood Alliance 342	Posted - 2014.03.07 09:40:00 - [75] - Quote Reav Hannari wrote: I honestly can't figure out why CCP fails to understand that short range weapons should dominate in their range while long range weapons need to stand off and slowly chip away at their targets. I don't think they have even looked at the Assault Rifle variants since they were originally designed other than gutting the Tactical. Because short range weapons need to account for more than just med frames using them, if the blaster had 600 dps at 20m everyone would **** and moan about scouts with blasters.
Alena Ventrallis The Neutral Zone 812	Posted - 2014.03.07 09:59:00 - [76] - Quote I read somewhere, and no I don't remember where or I'd link it, that proficiency would be boosted from 3% to 5%. I don't know where I got that, but I remember reading it somewhere here. Best PVE idea I've seen.
hold that Krusual Covert Operators Minmatar Republic 60	Posted - 2014.03.07 10:04:00 - [77] - Quote Do you think CCP makes these mistakes on purpose, in order to prolong player experience therein attempting to make more money? Sounds stupid I know. But not as stupid as further nerfing the breach AR. What I mean is, is all new weps see a fotm before nerf which causes not just a handful but a large group of people to place sp in them in order to stay competitive. While some people leave the game after their breach AR or flaylock gets nerfed so bad they can no longer be competitive unless they spend sp elsewhere, a 'large amount' do stay playing the game for whatever reason, and some of them will continually buy boosters because now they need more sp, or/and they buy aur items of the fotm. Even if they don't buy boosters they'll be grinding, maintaining some sort of active player base gaining capital for CCP/EVE brand. Tinfoil hat x 10
Arkena Wyrnspire Fatal Absolution 10630	Posted - 2014.03.07 11:00:00 - [78] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: I read somewhere, and no I don't remember where or I'd link it, that proficiency would be boosted from 3% to 5%. I don't know where I got that, but I remember reading it somewhere here. I doubt that in the extreme, and I've seen nothing to that effect. Also, it wouldn't make much of a difference in the end. Dual tanking would still be the name of the game. You have long since made your choice. What you make now is a mistake.
ZiwZih Seraphim Initiative.. 381	Posted - 2014.03.07 14:17:00 - [79] - Quote <3 DUST Forums: Endless lists of endless things & Final Solutions to everything; guess who would be proud to see it.
Arkena Wyrnspire Fatal Absolution 10657	Posted - 2014.03.07 18:30:00 - [80] - Quote ZiwZih wrote: <3 <3 you too. You have long since made your choice. What you make now is a mistake.

John Demonsbane Unorganized Ninja Infantry Tactics League of Infamy 2242	Posted - 2014.03.07 20:55:00 - [81] - Quote Well put. I've also always felt that damage mods were a scapegoat/red herring. The concept of dual damage mods that a couple of us had discussed in the dev blog thread (mentioned briefly here) would drive more diversity. While I agree that 3/5/7 is a much better breakdown, the thought of adding 5% more armor damage to my ScR or LR would still be tempting, much more so than the now-useless proficiency skill for those particular weapons. IMO, if you want to separate damage types, it should be the opposite. Damage mods should apply to armor or shield, proficiency to overall damage. Oh, and, Caldari master race, duh! CCP does not appear to be capable of grasping the high range/low DPS concept. "The line between disorder and order lies in logistics" -Sun Tzu Forum Warrior lv.2 Amarr victor!
MINA Longstrike 2Shitz 1Giggle United Brotherhood Alliance 343	Posted - 2014.03.08 02:06:00 - [82] - Quote Bumping in hopes that people read the later posts.
Varoth Drac The Unholy Legion Of DarkStar DARKSTAR ARMY 17	Posted - 2014.03.08 15:16:00 - [83] - Quote Regarding the AR, there are a couple of points people are missing. Comparing the AR to the ACR: Both the ACR's range advantage and fitting advantage are minor, however the ACR has a significantly smaller magazine when you consider rate of fire. This is going to be a lot more of a problem for the ACR with the upcoming increased TTK. Comparing the AR to the AScR: The scrambler rifles are significantly harder to fit than ARs. I really feel this is an issue that people overlook on the forums. I have equal skills in AR and scramber rifles, along with max PG/CPU skills, and I always feel a bit insane when i'm stripping tank off my suit to fit a scrambler over an AR. I do it because I love the scrambler rifle but it needs it's power to make it worthwhile. Not saying this necessarily counters the arguments about the AR, just that perhaps it isn't as imbalanced as people think. There is always an element of overreaction when it comes to change. On another note, there is a tendency to think only about the 4 rifles and forget the other weapons in the game. The rifles are not meant to be massively different from each other. The differences between blaster, laser, projectile and rail weapons are also covered by shotguns, laser rifles, mass drivers and sniper rifles.
Arkena Wyrnspire Fatal Absolution 10725	Posted - 2014.03.08 15:25:00 - [84] - Quote Varoth Drac wrote: Regarding the AR, there are a couple of points people are missing. Comparing the AR to the ACR: Both the ACR's range advantage and fitting advantage are minor, however the ACR has a significantly smaller magazine when you consider rate of fire. This is going to be a lot more of a problem for the ACR with the upcoming increased TTK. It also has the advantage that the damage profile is the best in the game. An ACR can also potentially reach an 85 round clip with the correct bonuses. Quote: Comparing the AR to the AScR: The scrambler rifles are significantly harder to fit than ARs. I really feel this is an issue that people overlook on the forums. I have equal skills in AR and scramber rifles, along with max PG/CPU skills, and I always feel a bit insane when i'm stripping tank off my suit to fit a scrambler over an AR. I do it because I love the scrambler rifle but it needs it's power to make it worthwhile. This is correct. I also feel that the ASCR damage profile is going to be terrible, so I don't have much of a problem with it. However, neither of these arguments address the huge differences in range profiles for no difference in DPS - indeed, some of these weapons have more DPS with their longer range. Quote: On another note, there is a tendency to think only about the 4 rifles and forget the other weapons in the game. The rifles are not meant to be massively different from each other. The differences between blaster, laser, projectile and rail weapons are also covered by shotguns, laser rifles, mass drivers and sniper rifles. Sure, that's fine. Again, them being similar isn't a problem. The problem is them being practically identical except some of them have flat-out better stats than others. You have long since made your choice. What you make now is a mistake.
Varoth Drac The Unholy Legion Of DarkStar DARKSTAR ARMY 17	Posted - 2014.03.08 19:07:00 - [85] - Quote Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: However, neither of these arguments address the huge differences in range profiles for no difference in DPS - indeed, some of these weapons have more DPS with their longer range. I was under the impression that the ACR had only a slightly longer range than the AR. I'm not saying you are definitely wrong about the imbalance. Just that perhaps there won't be much of a difference all things considered. Weapon kick is another potential issue which may be changed in 1.7 (CCP has a habit of changing more than they say) which adds more uncertainty. Perhaps we will have to wait and see exactly how things turn out. Will it ever possible for CCP to achieve complete balance? In b4 the AR is never seen again after 1.8....
Croned Gallente Federation 632	Posted - 2014.03.08 20:52:00 - [86] - Quote Can we get a blue tag in here to confirm that at least someone from CCP has read this? Son of a plasma cannon! TTK of the Weapons
Patrick57 5845	Posted - 2014.03.08 20:58:00 - [87] - Quote Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: This is goin ta be a long-ass thread. Y'all KNOW dat ***, muthafucka! I wanna dis ta be a productizzle rap. I aint talkin' bout chicken n' gravy biatch. Please refrain from comments like fuckin GÇÿlol u nerdGÇÖ GÇÿu hav no game lolGÇÖ etc. At long last, weGÇÖve gotten a thugged-out devSnoop Bloggy-Blogg on key chizzlez ta weaponry n' modulez affectin TTK. IGÇÖm shizzle mah playas has probably peeped tha chizzlez by now yo, but hereGÇÖs a quick summary: GÇó All riflez damage output nerfed, SMG also nerfed (12% plasma rifle, 10% scrambla rifle, 16% combat rifle, 9% assault combat rifle, 14% rail rifle, 9% SMG) GÇó Damage modz nerfed ta 3%/4%/5% damage increase fo' standard/enhanced/complex. GÇó Proficiency skill chizzled from direct damage bonus ta increased affinitizzle damage (RR proficiency gives 15% bonus ta armour rather than 15% ta both shieldz n' armour) GÇó Three freshly smoked up weapons introduced - bolt pistol, magsec SMG, n' ion pistol GÇó Mass drivers buffed hella fo' damage GÇó Laser riflez buffed up in range, scope, CQC damage, n' heat build-up LetGÇÖs peep all of dis up in sections, n' then peep tha overall effect dat these sweepin chizzlez will have. [P1] Rifle comparisons [P2] Sidearm comparisons [P3] Damage mod chizzles [P4] Proficiency chizzles [P5] Overall effect analysis + predictions Firstly, letGÇÖs analyse tha freshly smoked up statz of all tha weapons. Us thugs will begin wit straight DPS comparisons. Any weapon which will likely be unable ta reach its maximum DPS cuz itGÇÖs a semi-automatic or burst weapon is ghon be indicated wit a asterisk . This excludes charge mechanics. DPS at standard: Assault plasma rifle: 375 Breach plasma rifle: 300 Burst plasma rifle: ~350* Tactical plasma rifle: 420* Scrambla rifle: 750* DPS Assault scrambla rifle: 380 DPS Combat rifle: 540* DPS Assault combat rifle: 380 DPS Rail rifle: 360 DPS Assault rail rifle: 375 DPS SMG: 350 DPS Scrambla Pistol: 530 DPS* Not includin headshots Magsec SMG: 355 DPS Bolt pistol: 340 DPS Ion pistol: 310 DPS* HMG: 600 DPS What can we peep from this, biatch? We can peep dat wit tha exception of tha semi-automatic/burst weapons, all tha DPS joints is straight-up similar fo' they class. Da RR has hella higher DPS than tha other straight-up automatics yo, but it has a short charge time fo' realz. Accountin fo' tha charge time brangs tha weapon down ta a similar DPS level. [P1] Rifle comparisons A straight-up notable difference between riflez is tha range profile. Da plasma riflez have tha shortest range, tha combat riflez outranges tha plasma rifle, tha scrambla riflez outrange tha combat rifles, n' tha rail riflez outrange all tha other rifles. Range is, like obviously, a thugged-out dope advantage fo' realz. A longer range than tha opponent can offer a big-ass tactical edge. So naturally, if a weapon has a longer range than another, then if theyGÇÖre well balanced against each other tha shorter ranged weapon is ghon be mo' betta up in another area. Here our crazy asses gotz a set of weapons wit straight-up similar DPS stats n' general operation yo, but varyin ranges. Compare tha ACR n' tha plasma rifle. Da ACR do not fall down hella up in any major area compared ta tha plasma rifle. But ** dat shiznit yo, tha word on tha street is dat it beats tha plasma rifle on range. I peep dis as a funky-ass big-ass problem. Look all up in tha plasma assault rifle DPS. Look all up in tha other assault weapons. There is straight-up lil DPS difference yo, but all of these other weapons outrange tha plasma rifle. This is tha case fo' tha ASCR vs tha ACR as well. Da ARR aint as wack cuz of tha charge time yo, but it too has similar DPS at a much, much pimped outer range without any major penalties. Basic Rifle Comparison Summary/TL;DR: DPS differences between riflez is insignificant. Range differences is significant. Da tradeoffs fo' longer range is insignificant fo' realz. As a result, long range weapons is mo' betta up in dis model. Shorter ranged weapons should gotz a higher DPS from tradin off range. They donGÇÖt. This should be erected. Now letGÇÖs peep some discrepancies n' wack-ass thangs bout tha rifle class as a whole. Firstly, tha plasma rifle variants fo' realz. As a general rule, they is **. Before we start lookin at each of dem specifically, IGÇÖd just like ta address dis claim: forum myth wrote: the plasma riflez variants is knockoffz of tha other riflez so they should be worse I find dis statement ta be straight-up inadequate. Well shiiiit, it is skanky or lazy design ta git a weapon dat is simply GÇÿworseGÇÖ than others. Especially as tha assault variantz of tha other weapons is GÇÿmimicsGÇÖ of tha plasma assault rifle n' yet is as phat as or mo' betta than dat . A prime example of tha variants bein wack is tha breach assault rifle. Presently, it has tha lowest DPS of any rifle, by a long-ass margin. I aint talkin' bout chicken n' gravy biatch. But ** dat shiznit yo, tha word on tha street is dat it is bein nerfed by tha same cementage as tha main plasma rifle, n' is bein nerfed mo' than much stronger weapons like fuckin tha ACR. This is lazy work - itGÇÖs not a cold-ass lil case of tha breach straight-up needin dis nerf, cuz itGÇÖs blatantly obvious dat it donGÇÖt. This appears ta be simply a cold-ass lil case of tha breach havin not been looked at as its own weapon n' just hit wit a funky-ass blanket nerf. Well shiiiit, it is entirely unnecessary. As it happens, even wit pre-nerf stats it would have tha lowest DPS of any 1.8 rifle.
John Demonsbane Unorganized Ninja Infantry Tactics League of Infamy 2246	Posted - 2014.03.08 21:45:00 - [88] - Quote Patrick57 wrote: Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: This is goin ta be a long-ass thread. Y'all KNOW dat ***, muthafucka! I wanna dis ta be a productizzle rap. I aint talkin' bout chicken n' gravy biatch. Please refrain from comments like fuckin GÇÿlol u nerdGÇÖ GÇÿu hav no game lolGÇÖ etc. At long last, weGÇÖve gotten a thugged-out devSnoop Bloggy-Blogg on key chizzlez ta weaponry n' modulez affectin TTK. IGÇÖm shizzle mah playas has probably peeped tha chizzlez by now yo, but hereGÇÖs a quick summary: GÇó All riflez damage output nerfed, SMG also nerfed (12% plasma rifle, 10% scrambla rifle, 16% combat rifle, 9% assault combat rifle, 14% rail rifle, 9% SMG) GÇó Damage modz nerfed ta 3%/4%/5% damage increase fo' standard/enhanced/complex. GÇó Proficiency skill chizzled from direct damage bonus ta increased affinitizzle damage (RR proficiency gives 15% bonus ta armour rather than 15% ta both shieldz n' armour) GÇó Three freshly smoked up weapons introduced - bolt pistol, magsec SMG, n' ion pistol GÇó Mass drivers buffed hella fo' damage GÇó Laser riflez buffed up in range, scope, CQC damage, n' heat build-up LetGÇÖs peep all of dis up in sections, n' then peep tha overall effect dat these sweepin chizzlez will have. [P1] Rifle comparisons [P2] Sidearm comparisons [P3] Damage mod chizzles [P4] Proficiency chizzles [P5] Overall effect analysis + predictions Firstly, letGÇÖs analyse tha freshly smoked up statz of all tha weapons. Us thugs will begin wit straight DPS comparisons. Any weapon which will likely be unable ta reach its maximum DPS cuz itGÇÖs a semi-automatic or burst weapon is ghon be indicated wit a asterisk . This excludes charge mechanics. DPS at standard: Assault plasma rifle: 375 Breach plasma rifle: 300 Burst plasma rifle: ~350* Tactical plasma rifle: 420* Scrambla rifle: 750* DPS Assault scrambla rifle: 380 DPS Combat rifle: 540* DPS Assault combat rifle: 380 DPS Rail rifle: 360 DPS Assault rail rifle: 375 DPS SMG: 350 DPS Scrambla Pistol: 530 DPS* Not includin headshots Magsec SMG: 355 DPS Bolt pistol: 340 DPS Ion pistol: 310 DPS* HMG: 600 DPS What can we peep from this, biatch? We can peep dat wit tha exception of tha semi-automatic/burst weapons, all tha DPS joints is straight-up similar fo' they class. Da RR has hella higher DPS than tha other straight-up automatics yo, but it has a short charge time fo' realz. Accountin fo' tha charge time brangs tha weapon down ta a similar DPS level. [P1] Rifle comparisons A straight-up notable difference between riflez is tha range profile. Da plasma riflez have tha shortest range, tha combat riflez outranges tha plasma rifle, tha scrambla riflez outrange tha combat rifles, n' tha rail riflez outrange all tha other rifles. Range is, like obviously, a thugged-out dope advantage fo' realz. A longer range than tha opponent can offer a big-ass tactical edge. So naturally, if a weapon has a longer range than another, then if theyGÇÖre well balanced against each other tha shorter ranged weapon is ghon be mo' betta up in another area. Here our crazy asses gotz a set of weapons wit straight-up similar DPS stats n' general operation yo, but varyin ranges. Compare tha ACR n' tha plasma rifle. Da ACR do not fall down hella up in any major area compared ta tha plasma rifle. But ** dat shiznit yo, tha word on tha street is dat it beats tha plasma rifle on range. I peep dis as a funky-ass big-ass problem. Look all up in tha plasma assault rifle DPS. Look all up in tha other assault weapons. There is straight-up lil DPS difference yo, but all of these other weapons outrange tha plasma rifle. This is tha case fo' tha ASCR vs tha ACR as well. Da ARR aint as wack cuz of tha charge time yo, but it too has similar DPS at a much, much pimped outer range without any major penalties. Basic Rifle Comparison Summary/TL;DR: DPS differences between riflez is insignificant. Range differences is significant. Da tradeoffs fo' longer range is insignificant fo' realz. As a result, long range weapons is mo' betta up in dis model. Shorter ranged weapons should gotz a higher DPS from tradin off range. They donGÇÖt. This should be erected. Now letGÇÖs peep some discrepancies n' wack-ass thangs bout tha rifle class as a whole. Firstly, tha plasma rifle variants fo' realz. As a general rule, they is **. Before we start lookin at each of dem specifically, IGÇÖd just like ta address dis claim: forum myth wrote: the plasma riflez variants is knockoffz of tha other riflez so they should be worse I find dis statement ta be straight-up inadequate. Well shiiiit, it is skanky or lazy design ta git a weapon dat is simply GÇÿworseGÇÖ than others. Especially as tha assault variantz of tha other weapons is GÇÿmimicsGÇÖ of tha plasma assault rifle n' yet is as phat as or mo' betta than dat . A prime example of tha variants bein wack is tha breach assault rifle. Presently, it has tha lowest DPS of any rifle, by a long-ass margin. I aint talkin' bout chicken n' gravy biatch. But dat shiznit yo, tha word on tha street is dat it is bein nerfed by tha same cementage as tha main plasma rifle, n' is bein nerfed mo' than much stronger weapons like fuckin tha ACR. This is lazy work - itGÇÖs not a cold-ass lil case of tha breach straight-up needin dis nerf, cuz itGÇÖs blatantly obvious dat it donGÇÖt. This appears ta be simply a cold-ass lil case of tha breach havin not been looked at as its own weapon n' just hit wit a funky-ass blanket nerf. Well shiiiit, it is entirely unnecessary. As it happens, even wit pre-nerf stats it would have tha lowest DPS of any 1.8 rifle. Some how's this makes more sense than befo' "The line between disorder and order lies in logistics"** -Sun Tzu Forum Warrior lv.2 Amarr victor!
Arkena Wyrnspire Fatal Absolution 10782	Posted - 2014.03.09 09:33:00 - [89] - Quote Patrick57 wrote: Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: -snip gizoogle- You have long since made your choice. What you make now is a mistake.
DeadlyAztec11 Ostrakon Agency Gallente Federation 4530	Posted - 2014.03.09 12:03:00 - [90] - Quote Yeah, this is my feels going into 1.8. Fixed some issues, made others to replace them and yet also failed acknowledge others. Taco Cat backwards is still Taco Cat

Lorhak Gannarsein Science For Death 2006	Posted - 2014.03.09 12:35:00 - [91] - Quote You, sir, are the most proficient and constructive like-farmer this forum, nay, the world, has ever seen. I'm thinking that I'm going to be using my scrambler pistol as my primary weapon in 1.8 with the rifle for some emergency firepower. Assault ak.0 w/ScR+ScP 4LYFE Forum Warrior Level Two. (GëºGêçGëª)/
Arkena Wyrnspire Fatal Absolution 10800	Posted - 2014.03.09 12:57:00 - [92] - Quote Lorhak Gannarsein wrote: You, sir, are the most proficient and constructive like-farmer this forum, nay, the world, has ever seen. I'm thinking that I'm going to be using my scrambler pistol as my primary weapon in 1.8 with the rifle for some emergency firepower. I was rather generous and gave Sgt Kirk some likes as well. I don't think using an SCP as a sidearm to accompany another laser weapon is a great idea though. It's an excellent weapon, but the proficiency changes are going to hurt people with the same affinity on their weapons. IMO, the Magsec would be a superb sidearm for the SCR. You have long since made your choice. What you make now is a mistake.
LT Shanx OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 29	Posted - 2014.03.09 13:08:00 - [93] - Quote Waahhh... I read the whole thing, but more surprisingly, Sgt Kirk and Arkena Wyrnspire are the same person?! Why can't forumers be more easily identifiable? Look at me, I'm LT Shanx but I am also LT SHANKS.
Lorhak Gannarsein Science For Death 2007	Posted - 2014.03.09 13:19:00 - [94] - Quote Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: Lorhak Gannarsein wrote: You, sir, are the most proficient and constructive like-farmer this forum, nay, the world, has ever seen. I'm thinking that I'm going to be using my scrambler pistol as my primary weapon in 1.8 with the rifle for some emergency firepower. I was rather generous and gave Sgt Kirk some likes as well. I don't think using an SCP as a sidearm to accompany another laser weapon is a great idea though. It's an excellent weapon, but the proficiency changes are going to hurt people with the same affinity on their weapons. IMO, the Magsec would be a superb sidearm for the SCR. ScP is more thematic Although I will definitely give the Magsec a go. Assault ak.0 w/ScR+ScP 4LYFE Forum Warrior Level Two. (GëºGêçGëª)/
Cardio Therapy The Awesome Gang 4	Posted - 2014.03.09 13:38:00 - [95] - Quote After reading carefully all that Arkena said, I have to agree with all. These were exactly my thoughts and the reason to open the forum to write exactly this stuff. After I read the weapon changes in 1.8 published by CCP I got to one conclusion, and it is very simple: AR is almost dead, AR variants are already dead since long time and they will be even deeper buried. When there was a discussion the RR and CR are overpowered they were compared to the AR. By nerfing th AR with them they will be still OP vs AR. Many people run damage mods and many will continue. Most of the players are relying on armor tanking because of the damage mods. The weapons doing increased dmg to armor will be even more efficient. I donGÇÖt see any future for the AR and variants. I will wait for 1.9 to see if the **** will be fixed and most probably will change the game until then.
Joseph Ridgeson WarRavens League of Infamy 690	Posted - 2014.03.09 13:56:00 - [96] - Quote Croned wrote: Can we get a blue tag in here to confirm that at least someone from CCP has read this? A post was edited by Logibro so it has been seen and probably read. The Ion Pistol was something I was quite shocked to see how much it falls behind. What I think is most interesting is how similar the weapon DPS's are to one another. I am curious if the DPS of the weapons were the things that were looked at as part of the balancing because of how close they tend to fall in line. There are some weird ones like the laughably bad Breach or the semi-automatics that have huge DPS potentials but can probably never attain them. Maybe it is just a silly coincidence? With the Ion Pistol, I think the most interesting thing is the total damage per clip compared to the other weapons. 600 damage isn't even enough to kill some naked basic assault suits if they have high enough levels of the +5% Shield/Armor skills. I didn't realize that the charged shot would instantly overheat the weapon. If it didn't, you might have seen some interesting strategies with it. It would act like a shotgun at that point; sneak up on someone with a charge ready, pop them in the chest, swap to AR to take them out. Would have been like Halo's Plasma Pistol and Battle Rifle combo. Now it just doesn't make any sense how no one raised their hands when those numbers were being thrown about internally. Thanks for the analysis of the information. This shows that Dev Blogs and patch notes need to be released earlier so players have time to look at it and give calm, cool feedback. The Caldari Assault bonus might be changed because most everyone immediately stated that it was nearly worthless when it was leaked out a month ago. If everything had been released a month ago, maybe some glaring problems like the Ion Pistol, Breach AR, and Magsec might have been remedied.
Dagger-Two Tharumec Villore Accords 254	Posted - 2014.03.09 20:23:00 - [97] - Quote Humpity Hump, this thread needs a bump! ...and a blue tag Playing since 1st batch of closed beta keys.
Arkena Wyrnspire Fatal Absolution 10828	Posted - 2014.03.09 20:33:00 - [98] - Quote Dagger-Two wrote: Humpity Hump, this thread needs a bump! ...and a blue tag I'm pretty sure blue tags generally come during the week. If they come at all. Given what happened the last time I bothered to write a thread like this, no blue tag is forthcoming. You have long since made your choice. What you make now is a mistake.
LEHON Xeon Ahrendee Mercenaries General Tso's Alliance 305	Posted - 2014.03.09 20:55:00 - [99] - Quote If I may, I will add an addendum here about heavies for 1.8 that I originally wrote under another thread. Here's my issue with these new heavies. First of all, like some other guys said in here already, HMG is taking no nerfs at all. That may eventually cause a problem a long the lines with being able to get into and take over objectives in skirmishes. Get a couple heavies camping a letter (particularly in a dom) and you aren't going to be getting in there any time soon most likely without some sort of vehicle or a ton of people. HMGs already cut down people pretty good the way it is. You can have a TTK increase all you want, it still will equal out in the end back to what we have now, but this isn't the main problem. The main problem with HMGs currently is that slowdown or "sloth" effect when hit by continuous streams of bullets, completely stopping any player's ability to get behind cover once they get fired upon by an HMG. Second, we're all taking a grenade nerf, both actively through a reduction in the number we can carry and also subtly through heavy explosive resistances. I like to use core nades at times. They especially are helpful when you have heavies that spawn in around an objective you're hacking and try to get the jump on you. Bring down their shields with a CR or ScR while jumping around while cooking a core nade, toss that sucker and a lot of times you can then finish them off. No longer possible with the explosive resistances. I'll just use the base damage for a rough estimate, take 25% off of 600 and you're already down to 450. You get a sentinel that is using brick tank with around 1300 armor, you aren't even going to get through half his HP. Then you combine that with rifle nerfs, proficiency nerfs, and damage mod nerfs, and things are gonna get ugly. I can say the same with REs. Take 25% off of 1500 and you're down to 1,125. Fully tanked Amarr sentinels will easily resist RE blasts without an issue, and if their shields full to begin with, more than one RE. Lastly we have the resistance bonuses. I'll use Gallente and Amarr as those have the rail/projectile resistance. For any engagements at any range, most people are going to be still using RR or CR as an armor counter weapon (although we'll see somewhat of a return of MD I'm sure). If people using these Amarr/Gallente sentinels hold true to the heavy idea and use HMGs, then this whole ordeal will not even be an issue, however as this last event has shown, we now have plenty of scrubs that use sentinel fatsuits with RR. Taking this resistance bonus into account, that's 10 to 15% for projectile and rail weapons. This means that any medium suit, even a tanked logi suit with RR with the max out of around 1000 eHP still will fail miserably in a standard engagement with a sentinel suit. It's plain mathematics. If they notice each other at around the same time (fighting even at the longest optimal range available), or even if the logi suit gets a slight jump on the Amarr sentinel from a flank, he is still going to loose. 1000 eHP is not going to outdo around 2000 eHP. It's as simple as that. That is just from what we have now already pre 1.8 Now you factor in that extra 10 or 15% resistance and that Amarr or Gallente sentinel will trump that logi or other medium suit every single time. Like the OP said above, that 15% makes for an extra 210 more HP. Does not seem like much, but when we are dealing with these high of numbers, that is a ton. That sentinel will be afforded at least an extra few seconds (with the new reduced TTK) due to that bonus while the other medium suits have none. If these new heavies were only to use HMGs, forges, or sidearms, then I could easily buy into the argument that they aren't overpowered as the argument of "well fight them from outside of their optimal and you'll have no trouble" would be true. However, I know full well, with these new bonuses, light weapon heavies, particularly the RR heavies will become even more prevalent than they are now and it will be much worse than currently. TL;DR 1.Heavy resistances to explosives will cause huge problems when using REs and grenades to counter their armor 2. Simple numerics combined with new bonuses means in an equal situation and even a slight disadvantage, light weapon heavies will prevail every single time against scout and medium suits. 3. If heavies only functioned optimally at CQC - lower mid ranges (like they are designed to) none of these issues would even present a problem. 4. I feel that one bonus or the other should have been used for heavies. Either they gain a resistance to certain weapon types based upon race, OR resistance to explosives. Getting both at once I feel leads to a huge discrepancy for other suit users and as you said earlier Arkena, heavies will reign supreme, particularly light weapon and HMG sentinels. It's a trap! In this patch we can't repel firepower of that magnitude! - Admiral Ackbar would say in ambush w Nyain San
Arkena Wyrnspire Fatal Absolution 10841	Posted - 2014.03.09 21:52:00 - [100] - Quote LEHON Xeon wrote: -snip- Excellent post is excellent. I can't +1 you enough. You have long since made your choice. What you make now is a mistake.

Zahle Undt Bullet Cluster Legacy Rising 877	Posted - 2014.03.09 22:04:00 - [101] - Quote Yep LEON pretty much laid it out there and more rationally with a great deal less swearing than I would've used. Combined with LAVs mostly eliminating the Sentinels big weakness and we have a mass influx of heavies come 1.8 Most tankers are like sand people. They frighten easily, but will quickly return...and in greater numbers.
Patrick57 5901	Posted - 2014.03.09 22:12:00 - [102] - Quote Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: Patrick57 wrote: Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: -snip gizoogle- I had to. Knight convinced me. >_>
Vell0cet SVER True Blood General Tso's Alliance 1053	Posted - 2014.03.10 02:29:00 - [103] - Quote First let me start by saying that there will certainly be further balancing necessary after 1.8. I'm sure CCP realizes this. My hope is that 1.9 will hit 3-4 weeks after 1.8 and will only contain small, incremental balancing tweaks based on how things are play tested once 1.8 goes live. I think people are underestimating the blaster AR. It has 2 major advantages, laser-like precision, and big clips. In a low TTK game those don't mean a whole lot, but in a high TTK game, those differences are huge. Every bullet will count, and spray/pray will be much less effective. This gives the AR a lot of advantages in a higher TTK game. The blaster AR also has a fairly well-balanced damage profile. I expect a lot more shield buffers in 1.8 as the recharge mechanic will be much more useful in longer engagements where you can duck in-and-out of cover, also because damage mods will be less attractive. I think people are being premature in pronouncing the death of the blaster AR based on spreadsheet data. We really need to see how things play out when this patch goes live. I also think damage mods will still have an important place. In some roles, having more gank is much more advantageous to more tank. It is the only way to boost DPS against your weapon's weaker damage type. As a fan of Amarr weapons, I know I will be relying on them more than ever to chew through armor before overheating. A larger shield buffer won't help me if I can't eat through my target's armor before he ducks into cover to rep up. Regarding heavies being OP, I expect scouts to help substantially with this. I'm hoping to see more paper-rock-scissors where heavies beat mediums which beat scouts which beat heavies. That's an interesting dynamic that keeps things fun with checks/balances. I like heavies being slow, tough behemoths that require teamwork to truly shine. My biggest concern is the nerfs to AV grenades making the LAV-Heavy combo way too OP. AV grenades should be an effective counter to LAVs (especially cheap/BPO versions). If heavies do end up being OP, I think nerfing their turn speed would be a good place to start. Overall I've never been more excited/optimistic for a release since beta. Having a viable LR, and a healthy TTK will be fantastic, and make fights so much more tactical and fun. We will certainly need more balancing tweaks, but I think they can be smaller in scope and much easier to manage +- 2-3% here and there. Also AV/vehicle balance seriously needs to be addressed. Best PvE idea ever!
Vespasian Andendare Subsonic Synthesis RISE of LEGION 616	Posted - 2014.03.10 16:12:00 - [104] - Quote Well written analysis! I'm afraid that CCP isn't even listening, though, and the changes are probably already set in stone. I honestly don't understand why CCP doesn't realize that weapons with short ranges need much higher dps to compensate! The downfall of using an AR over any of the other rifles is that it simply stops being effective past a certain range. The same cannot be said for a long range rifle. It operates just as effectively at close range as it does at long range. AR, Ion, etc. need superior dps (~390 dps) to make it a worthwhile alternative to a long range rifle. "But it'll be too powerful at close range! We'll get killed every time!" Well, yeah. That's the idea. Its the same idea that you had when you selected a RR and thought "I can kill them at range and they can't even reach me!" >> Play Dust 514 FREE! Sign up for exclusive gear today! <<
Dagger-Two Tharumec Villore Accords 254	Posted - 2014.03.11 00:55:00 - [105] - Quote To the top! Playing since 1st batch of closed beta keys.
Dreniella Expert Intervention Caldari State 32	Posted - 2014.03.11 05:45:00 - [106] - Quote You should make a fansite/blog and write these things there tbh.
Arkena Wyrnspire Fatal Absolution 10892	Posted - 2014.03.11 07:03:00 - [107] - Quote Dreniella wrote: You should make a fansite/blog and write these things there tbh. Why bother when I can farm likes for my glorious like counter instead? You have long since made your choice. What you make now is a mistake.
NobIesse Oblige Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 175	Posted - 2014.03.11 07:58:00 - [108] - Quote Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: Dreniella wrote: You should make a fansite/blog and write these things there tbh. Why bother when I can farm likes for my glorious like counter instead? Stahp! We're going to go broke paying your forum warrior salary! I'm CEO, Bitch Incentivizing n00bs to carry me cir.12/13
Rynx Sinfar Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 1174	Posted - 2014.03.11 16:59:00 - [109] - Quote This is lacking a lot of key information. I think the logic is sound and I generally enjoyed the posts (Needs some proofreading, check the statements made under DPS list with the DPS list, also check sidearm ranges for SMG and Scrambler Pistol, lastly the clip size mentioned for Scrambler Pistol can only be obtained via level 5 operation skill). Please note the items below might not "decide" anything but may adjust severity (like how badly OP something might be). Items I think should be considered along with above arguments: 1. More dev blogs are inbound. Obviously you are aware of this and I'm sure will update your analysis accordingly. Also while this is listed separately many items I mention may be involved in these dev blogs 2. New Gear Wobble - New suits are releasing, some new sidearms, and a new equipment which is scout focused. Expect people to pile into new hotness. This gets... fuzzy to incorporate and should mostly be kept in mind rather than written. 3. I'm not going to argue that the AR does not have a proper place. However keep in mind the new suits and damage mod nerf. The new suits will raise the average shield strength you encounter permanently. The damage mod nerf does indeed mean more shields on average as well. At this moment an AR/SCR analysis should always include current and future average shield/armor ratios. Same applies to sidearms. 4. Magsec - As mentioned range is critical in DUST. However so is function. Two factors in the RR charge time mitigation is range (they are doing less DPS or can't touch you) and prediction/throttle. Keep in mind what a sidearm normally is. When are they drawn, when are they ignored, what weapons you'll be up against at those moments, and expected ranges at those moments. 5. Magsec 2 - The above assumes conventional weapons. The Magsec is outclassed by even the AR, however rather than comparing the capacity of the Magsec to other sidearms or light weapons. Re-compare unconventional fittings with the new Magsec equipped. Consider AV weapons with what amounts to a gimped AR as primary. Consider the MD with the same. The proto magsec has an optimal near my stock HMG's effective. The Magsec SMG may be about to make many builds more viable as a gap filler rather than a backup. You'll definitely die more from the Magsec than any other Sidearm but my opinion is it will be because new builds that depend on it will gain popularity where the player would have otherwise ran a normal rifle build. 6. Ion Pistol - I'm waiting on cooldown time before judgement, but have concerns regardless. 7. Damage mods - In addition to announced reasons keep in mind 1 of the new scout suits, 1 of the new commandos, and 2 of the new sentinels will have more high slots obtainable than pre 1.8. Additionally potential increases in Flux grenade use or laser rifle use should be considered. Lastly if they were going to announce changes to armor/health modules I would imagine they would do so when they do the suit dev blogs. 8. Proficiency changes - This should be considered along with the damage mods. My understanding is proficiency skill stacks with damage mods. Thus lvl 5 proficiency with 1 complex damage mod currently adds an extra 1.5% or half a basic. Tiny but notable. With 2 you get decently close to a basic as bonus. Additionally you're mentioning this will encourage dual tanking, however many other factors apply. For one currently RR and CR are most popular which are armor effective. Additionally most suits aren't set up for "proper" dual tanking. Mercs may shore up weakness but suits favor one or the other. Additionally these two items play into each other for Commandos and Assaults as popular weapons may lead to popular suit variants. Also damage type modifiers stack on the others I believe. Which is why the scrambler pistol has a 450% bonus to SHIELD head shots, and a 240% bonus to armor headshots (base 300%). So a current proficiency bonus of 15% on a scrambler rifle is a total of 138% against shields. This also stacks with damage modules (1 for 152%, 2 for 164%). This should also be considered when examining the damage mod buff, the rebalancing of the laser rifle, and the new shield suits. 9. Suit changes - Shield recovery buffs are inbound for some caldari and minmatar suits. Gallante will have natural healing ability. 10. Equipment changes - although I have only heard it from players my understanding is an equipment nerf is inbound to balance new logi skills that have been shown by devs (not sure if official). This will have a circular balance with grenades. Less grenades, more equipment, more equipment more grenades. However if shields are a big deal then flux supplies will be important. This is also important in how it will impact the availability of armor repairs for an armor tanker, both from heal hives and nerfed repair tools (on average) 11. Weapon/armor analysis in laboratory settings aren't solid data - Fights infrequently begin simultaneously, additionally those are battles that a more competent player ignores. They should also be analysed as a sequence. you may frequently encounter weakened enemies, or be weak yourself. An extender is good, however wasted when you are not being struck. When weighing the value of damage, health, and recovery the conditions are tantamount. Examples being sniping, keeping together, running support, hacking, room clearing, potential FF, running from enemies, Flux presence, presence of cover, enemy skill level (can be anticipated in PC), supply depot availability and flanking. Even the scanner has an impact as you are more likely to be "ambushed" in a scanner heavy environment or vice versa. While laboratory testing is neat and tidy, I do not think it can provide either exact results or demonstrate trends as it can not be proven as an acceptable average. As mentioned this isn't intended as being critical or it would be longer, appreciated the read Subdreddit Director Leading contributor to the Great Text Wall of Subdreddit
Monkey MAC Rough Riders.. 2178	Posted - 2014.03.11 22:28:00 - [110] - Quote While I see your point with the damage mods, at the same time. 1) If Damage Mods provide more power than a shield extender then the shield extender becomes obselete 2) This creates the current shield/armour inbalance because Shield Extender are useless against damage mods, while armour is not. 3) By nerfing Damage Mods shields now become relevamt again, a Shield Tanked suit is now NOT at a disadvantage. 4) HOWEVER gallantean suits need reduced CPU, amd Caldari reduced PG to discourage brick tanking these suits. Unless your a Computer Scientist don't tell me how Game Mechanics Work. Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior of the Trees Lvl 2.

Arkena Wyrnspire Fatal Absolution 10926	Posted - 2014.03.11 22:41:00 - [111] - Quote @Rynx Sinfar: Decent post noted. Let's talk about some of those points. 3. Due to dual tanking, I see the average shield and armour strength of most suits being quite similar as most people stack HP modules. 4+5. That's pretty much exactly it. The MSMG doesn't directly outperform rifles, it won't be replacing any of them - but it can give a huge amount of flexibility by providing what amounts to only a slightly weaker version of a rifle as a sidearm. As you noted, that lets you run AV weapons, shotguns, etc with much more general versatility. 8. The idea of some suits not being as suited for dual tanking doesn't work here. Damage mods and shield mods directly compete for the same slots and resources - so any suit that can use damage mods and armour plates can dual tank. And most can, really. There aren't really any suits that can't be feasibly dual tanked. 10. Very minor, borderline irrelevant. 11. Of course. It can be quite obvious what will work best all other factors being equal, though, and that's really the point of this - to see what can be predicted from what we have. Generally, if something is better when things are equal, unless there's some unconventional balancing mechanic for it, then that item will simply generally be better. Some of your post seems a little confused. You list 'items that should be considered along with the other arguments' but then list as one of those concerns the ion pistol, without commenting on any actual information missing from the arguments (apart from possibly the cooldown time, which makes no difference). For those initial things you pointed out: Source for sidearm ranges: https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=136371&find=unread They're based on the standard ranges, as the entire thing is based off STD gear. An analysis of all the tiers would be overly long and pointless, as there's no real difference. So these are correct. I see no discrepancies in the DPS charts. You're quite correct on the SCP skill. That certainly is an oversight on my part, and it'll be tweaked when next I redo this. But I'm slightly baffled by your assertion that this post is 'missing a lot of key information' when really the only thing here is the SCP operations skill, which is a fairly minor edit. Monkey MAC wrote: While I see your point with the damage mods, at the same time. 1) If Damage Mods provide more power than a shield extender then the shield extender becomes obselete 2) This creates the current shield/armour inbalance because Shield Extender are useless against damage mods, while armour is not. 3) By nerfing Damage Mods shields now become relevamt again, a Shield Tanked suit is now NOT at a disadvantage. 4) HOWEVER gallantean suits need reduced CPU, amd Caldari reduced PG to discourage brick tanking these suits. 1 - Sure it does. That's why they should be at a similar power level. 2 - I don't think so. A shield extender is not useless against a damage mod, nor is it useless in comparison to a damage mod. The topic of shield vs armour is a complex one, but it's not exactly this specifically. 3 - Not quite how this works. It's not that a shield tanked suit is no longer at a disadvantage (it was on relatively even footing in the first place in terms of direct comparisons between the two) it's that damage modded suits are now definitely at a disadvantage and you should use a shield extender instead. 4 - No. This would require a comprehensive rebalance of module costs to actually work properly without crippling both suits involved. You have long since made your choice. What you make now is a mistake.
Monkey MAC Rough Riders.. 2182	Posted - 2014.03.11 23:52:00 - [112] - Quote You see you provided an example of damage mod v Shield extender, which you is biased AGAINST the shield extender. Lets try a few others. Example 1 You are allowed 1H 1L, you may only go tank with your suits tank type. Armour: 1Plate + 1Dmg Mod Shield: 1Extender + any non tank based mod. Winner: Armour Example 2 You are allowed 1H 1L, you may have any mod you like. Winning Combination: 1plate + 1 Dmg Mod So long as a Damage Mod is mathematically equivalent to a Shield Extender, Shield Tanking suits are at a disadvantage. Why? In an armour suit you can have damage + health, in a shield suit you must choose between on or the other, since currently there is no low slot module that provides a bonus that is mathematically equivalent to an armour plate. That is why this patch you have caldari suit stacking as many plates as everyone else. Armour Plate > Lows Shield Extenders = Damage Mods(Highs) Unless your a Computer Scientist don't tell me how Game Mechanics Work. Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior of the Trees Lvl 2.
TheGoebel Kite Co. Couriers 107	Posted - 2014.03.12 03:18:00 - [113] - Quote So how long did it take from when you posted your first armor dissertation till actual armor change? I do think this turnaround will be faster, but no sense in not collecting data. EDIT: Maybe we should look between change and meaningful change as well.
Arkena Wyrnspire Fatal Absolution 10942	Posted - 2014.03.12 07:17:00 - [114] - Quote Monkey MAC wrote: You see you provided an example of damage mod v Shield extender, which you is biased AGAINST the shield extender. Lets try a few others. Example 1 You are allowed 1H 1L, you may only go tank with your suits tank type. Armour: 1Plate + 1Dmg Mod Shield: 1Extender + any non tank based mod. Winner: Armour Example 2 You are allowed 1H 1L, you may have any mod you like. Winning Combination: 1plate + 1 Dmg Mod So long as a Damage Mod is mathematically equivalent to a Shield Extender, Shield Tanking suits are at a disadvantage. Why? In an armour suit you can have damage + health, in a shield suit you must choose between on or the other, since currently there is no low slot module that provides a bonus that is mathematically equivalent to an armour plate. That is why this patch you have caldari suit stacking as many plates as everyone else. Armour Plate > Lows Shield Extenders = Damage Mods(Highs) I biased it against the shield extender? Hardly. My example was based purely off of a comparison between fitting a shield mod and fitting a damage mod. Your own example is hilariously bad for these purposes. Why go with only one tank type? Compare fitting 1 shield extender and 1 plate to 1 plate and 1 damage mod. This isn't a shields vs armour debate. This is pointing out that dual tanking is by far the best option come 1.8. TheGoebel wrote: So how long did it take from when you posted your first armor dissertation till actual armor change? I do think this turnaround will be faster, but no sense in not collecting data. EDIT: Maybe we should look between change and meaningful change as well. Why hello there. I remember you. There's pretty much zero chance of any changes happening before 1.8 here. After that, who knows? You have long since made your choice. What you make now is a mistake.
Beld Errmon Nyain Chan 1419	Posted - 2014.03.12 08:22:00 - [115] - Quote good thread.
TheGoebel Kite Co. Couriers 107	Posted - 2014.03.12 09:24:00 - [116] - Quote Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: TheGoebel wrote: So how long did it take from when you posted your first armor dissertation till actual armor change? I do think this turnaround will be faster, but no sense in not collecting data. EDIT: Maybe we should look between change and meaningful change as well. Why hello there. I remember you. There's pretty much zero chance of any changes happening before 1.8 here. After that, who knows? I actually haven't played dust in forever but I saw this linked on reddit and thought I'd take the chance to be a negative ******* in a constructive thread. You know, again.
Monkey MAC Rough Riders.. 2183	Posted - 2014.03.12 09:24:00 - [117] - Quote Yes Dual-Tanking will be the best option its always been the best option thats why we have brick-tankers since forever. What I disagree with is your belief that extenders and damage mods should be comparable. They should not. With the reduction of damage mods Shield only tanking is viable again, we now need to focus on ways to stop brick tanking, yet still allow dual tanking. Unless your a Computer Scientist don't tell me how Game Mechanics Work. Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior of the Trees Lvl 2.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 1595	Posted - 2014.03.12 10:11:00 - [118] - Quote I'd make further comment but the patch here is more of the typical band-aid BS we're used to seeing. Of particular note in my eyes: changing proficiency skills: Bad idea. Arkena explained why. it makes dual tanking king again. Also means every asshat will have a main/sidearm combo to breach both defenses. And do it poorly. Scrambler/Mass driver commandos will probably dominate here. I know what I plan to lord over you all with in the near future. Damage mod changes: Also means tanks will remain king for the next three months. AV takes yet another nerf. Huzzah.
Lorhak Gannarsein Science For Death 2028	Posted - 2014.03.12 14:34:00 - [119] - Quote Monkey MAC wrote: Yes Dual-Tanking will be the best option its always been the best option thats why we have brick-tankers since forever. What I disagree with is your belief that extenders and damage mods should be comparable. They should not. With the reduction of damage mods Shield only tanking is viable again, we now need to focus on ways to stop brick tanking, yet still allow dual tanking. But dual tanking hasn't been better, unless you have a really bad habit of betting ambushed. Damage mods are only mathematically superior after the suit has 720 EHP, because this is the point at which an extra extender provides less than 10% of your EHP. Generally speaking further damage mods aren't really worthwhile based on that logic, but at a certain point (i.e. 720 EHP) you don't really need much more HP and the little extra bit of gank can be far more useful. essentially, if you're trying to max out your suit, don't fit more than one damage mod unless you're a heavy. (I think? Please feel free to judge me harshly if my opinions are incorrect.) Assault ak.0 w/ScR+ScP 4LYFE Forum Warrior Level Two. (GëºGêçGëª)/
Arkena Wyrnspire Fatal Absolution 10965	Posted - 2014.03.13 07:11:00 - [120] - Quote Lorhak Gannarsein wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: Yes Dual-Tanking will be the best option its always been the best option thats why we have brick-tankers since forever. What I disagree with is your belief that extenders and damage mods should be comparable. They should not. With the reduction of damage mods Shield only tanking is viable again, we now need to focus on ways to stop brick tanking, yet still allow dual tanking. But dual tanking hasn't been better, unless you have a really bad habit of betting ambushed. Damage mods are only mathematically superior after the suit has 720 EHP, because this is the point at which an extra extender provides less than 10% of your EHP. Generally speaking further damage mods aren't really worthwhile based on that logic, but at a certain point (i.e. 720 EHP) you don't really need much more HP and the little extra bit of gank can be far more useful. essentially, if you're trying to max out your suit, don't fit more than one damage mod unless you're a heavy. (I think? Please feel free to judge me harshly if my opinions are incorrect.) That's pretty much it. Also, shield extenders can be worth using over damage mods even on heavies when you count resistance bonuses. Monkey MAC wrote: Yes Dual-Tanking will be the best option its always been the best option thats why we have brick-tankers since forever. What I disagree with is your belief that extenders and damage mods should be comparable. They should not. With the reduction of damage mods Shield only tanking is viable again, we now need to focus on ways to stop brick tanking, yet still allow dual tanking. It is not my belief that they should be comparable. They just simply are. They directly compete for the same slots and resources, and it often comes down to a choice between one and the other. How do you define dual tanking differently from brick tanking? You have long since made your choice. What you make now is a mistake.

TheGoebel Kite Co. Couriers 107	Posted - 2014.03.13 15:00:00 - [121] - Quote I was thinking about WyrmspireGÇÖs focus on the damage/range ratio over all other factors. IGÇÖm trying to figure out a way that fitting requirements could be used to balance but I canGÇÖt get past the idea that the best all around performing rifle will be worth the fitting cost. Consider proto rifles. Barring the faction version they are not easy to fit and the increased performance does not keep pace with the cost of fitting. Would you roll in a proto suit with proto modules and use a basic weapon? Or do you build around the gun? So if one rifle has better performance despite higher fitting cost weGÇÖre still going to choose it over another weapon. The exception would be when the fitting requirement is so high that it becomes unreasonable. When the price is untenable, I call that the GÇ£reactive plateGÇ¥ event. Fitting changes arenGÇÖt useless but have very little effect on the actual weapon choices. You gravitate to the best weapon. What IGÇÖm trying to say is that weapons with inadequate clip sizes, accuracy, RoF or fitting wonGÇÖt have a niche, they will just not be considered. If you want meaningful choices then you need to make the word GÇ£bestGÇ¥ more subjective. So it becomes the best weapon for a situation or play style. Things that make that happen are damage and range. It may seem too simple but I canGÇÖt think of another way to make that balance work.
Monkey MAC Rough Riders.. 2188	Posted - 2014.03.13 15:13:00 - [122] - Quote Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: Lorhak Gannarsein wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: Yes Dual-Tanking will be the best option its always been the best option thats why we have brick-tankers since forever. What I disagree with is your belief that extenders and damage mods should be comparable. They should not. With the reduction of damage mods Shield only tanking is viable again, we now need to focus on ways to stop brick tanking, yet still allow dual tanking. But dual tanking hasn't been better, unless you have a really bad habit of betting ambushed. Damage mods are only mathematically superior after the suit has 720 EHP, because this is the point at which an extra extender provides less than 10% of your EHP. Generally speaking further damage mods aren't really worthwhile based on that logic, but at a certain point (i.e. 720 EHP) you don't really need much more HP and the little extra bit of gank can be far more useful. essentially, if you're trying to max out your suit, don't fit more than one damage mod unless you're a heavy. (I think? Please feel free to judge me harshly if my opinions are incorrect.) That's pretty much it. Also, shield extenders can be worth using over damage mods even on heavies when you count resistance bonuses. Monkey MAC wrote: Yes Dual-Tanking will be the best option its always been the best option thats why we have brick-tankers since forever. What I disagree with is your belief that extenders and damage mods should be comparable. They should not. With the reduction of damage mods Shield only tanking is viable again, we now need to focus on ways to stop brick tanking, yet still allow dual tanking. It is not my belief that they should be comparable. They just simply are. They directly compete for the same slots and resources, and it often comes down to a choice between one and the other. How do you define dual tanking differently from brick tanking? Dual-Tanking is the act of spreading your tank across multiple tank types in order to achieve different positives and negatives to that of a single tank type. Brick-Tanking is an Extreme form of dual-tanking where you stack the maximum amount of EHP modules to obtain the largest possible health. Example. 3H 3L Dual-Tanker: 1x Extender 1x Energizer 1x Damage Mod, 1x Reactive Plate 1x Dampener 1x CodeBreaker Gets different benefits to a Shield Tanker, (higher armour values allow for faster repping with relvant support) Gets different benefits to a Armour Tanker, (higher shields allow for small amount of standalone capability) Gets to use multiple modules to good effect. +25% Dampening +25% Hacking +80% Shield Reps +5% Damage Brick-Tanker: 3x Extender, 3x Armour Plate Aims for absolute maximum EHP, gets no additional benifits still gets amplfied negatives of each tank type. Slow and limited reps, built for singular engagments requires regular support. Unless your a Computer Scientist don't tell me how Game Mechanics Work. Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior of the Trees Lvl 2.
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI 10055	Posted - 2014.03.20 20:52:00 - [123] - Quote +3 Dual tanking epidemic caused by proficiency and damage mod nerfs Extreme damage profile weapons will die out No account for range vs DPS in balancing weapons of the same firing type Reckless blanket balancing makes horrible weapons even worse I'm scared for 1.8 Gû¦Gû+Supreme emperor god-kingpÇÉKAGEH¦PSHIpÇæ// Lord of threads // Forum alt Gû¦Gû+
RemingtonBeaver Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 248	Posted - 2014.03.20 21:08:00 - [124] - Quote Beautiful work Arkena! It's good to know what weapons to spec into...the second best ones. We can pickle that.
Arkena Wyrnspire Fatal Absolution 11535	Posted - 2014.03.20 22:02:00 - [125] - Quote RemingtonBeaver wrote: Beautiful work Arkena! It's good to know what weapons to spec into...the second best ones. So, because they're likely to end up the best as the best one gets nerfed? I'm afraid CCP doesn't seem to work in that kind of logical fashion. You have long since made your choice. What you make now is a mistake.
Zero Harpuia Turalyon 514 Turalyon Alliance 1479	Posted - 2014.03.21 02:04:00 - [126] - Quote Just throw in the stealth ScP nerf data and fix the typo I messaged you about and I'll feel good giving this a few +1s. Shields as Weapons Zelda Dynasty Warriors is a real thing.
Gavr1Io Pr1nc1p 227	Posted - 2014.03.21 02:27:00 - [127] - Quote why does the most OP one get the least nerf? (yes ScR, I'm looking at you) Kills-Archduke Ferdinand Balance!
Arkena Wyrnspire Fatal Absolution 11549	Posted - 2014.03.21 07:06:00 - [128] - Quote Gavr1Io Pr1nc1p wrote: why does the most OP one get the least nerf? (yes ScR, I'm looking at you) The nerf differences are tiny percentages. I don't see anything changing in terms of rifle vs rifle balance. Though your assertion that the SCR is the most OP amuses me. You have long since made your choice. What you make now is a mistake.
Lorhak Gannarsein Science For Death 2242	Posted - 2014.03.22 01:29:00 - [129] - Quote Hmm. So basically, rereading this I'm seeing that I should fit enhanced damage mods if I fit any, and it might not be worthwhile proto-ing SMG today. ak.0 4 LYFE Large Missile Turrets: the real unicorns of DUST.
Arkena Wyrnspire Fatal Absolution 12199	Posted - 2014.04.09 22:02:00 - [130] - Quote Well, I guess I'll have a look at this a month or so later. In essence, the predictions of this thread were as follows: The Magsec SMG would be the sidearm of choice post-1.8 Due to proficiency changes, laser and explosive weaponry would be hit hard Shield extenders would be preferred over damage mods Plasma rifle variants would be weakest in class CRs would be popular due to the excellent damage profile This patch would not change much in terms of rifle vs rifle balance with the exception of the SCR, affected by proficiency Things that came after this thread: - News of the SCP nerf - Details of cloaking and the playstyle changes brought with that Things that this thread did not adequately cover: - Consequences on dropsuits - A full rifle comparison, RR/CR/AR/SCR As for the predictions, I feel that they were generally correct. Looking at the field is an anecdotal experience, and though I firmly believe that I am seeing more magsecs than pistols and that I'm seeing no breach rifles and few damage mods, it's not really something that I can convince anyone with. So using market data pulled from the API (which is quite nicely displayed at http://dust.thang.dk/market_tryhardinator.php ) we can see that the following: The magsec is the most popular sidearm All forms of laser weaponry are relatively uncommon, with the SCR being the least common rifle and the SCP being the least common sidearm Shield extenders are more common than damage mods No plasma rifle variants occupy a notable market share CRs are very popular Admittedly I completely failed to foresee the scrambler pistol nerf and that has reduced its viability considerably beyond what I predicted, and the effect of suits was not covered adequately. So I'd say this thread was approximately accurate. Not an unmitigated success with predictions of 100% accuracy, but fairly close to the mark. Thoughts? You have long since made your choice. What you make now is a mistake. EUrobro

Absolute Idiom II SyNergy Gaming EoN. 943	Posted - 2014.04.17 09:57:00 - [131] - Quote Why do you think the Rail Rifle edges out the Combat Rifle in popularity? Adding up the top tens from the Try-Hardinator: Rail Rifle [and variants]: 22 + 13.3 = 35.3 % Combat Rifle [all variants]: 14.4 + 8.1 + 7.3 = 29.8 % Assault Rifle [all variants]: 9.5 + 6.2 = 15.7 % Fanfest 2012 - Winning Team + MVP - £1100 in prizes Fanfest 2013 - Winning Team - £500 in prizes Fanfest 2014 - ???
Arkena Wyrnspire Fatal Absolution 12364	Posted - 2014.04.17 10:47:00 - [132] - Quote Absolute Idiom II wrote: Why do you think the Rail Rifle edges out the Combat Rifle in popularity? Adding up the top tens from the Try-Hardinator: Rail Rifle [and variants]: 22 + 13.3 = 35.3 % Combat Rifle [all variants]: 14.4 + 8.1 + 7.3 = 29.8 % Assault Rifle [all variants]: 9.5 + 6.2 = 15.7 % Probably because of the extra range being useful and because of the comfort factor of having a fully automatic weapon as opposed to a burst one. You have long since made your choice. What you make now is a mistake. EUrobro


Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online/DUST514, the EVE/DUST514 logo, EVE/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to OMG Labs to use EVE Online/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, OMG Labs. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.