DUST Search - Unnecessary Nerf Bat

Monkey MAC wrote:

Becuse same ratios, not exact same quantities.
So 1 reaction might have twice as much of everything. But assuming both reactions happen in the same conditions then one of the chemicals are responsible.
So in order to find the culprit, you chamge 1 and measure results.

Its anology for your argument about balance. You must always assume the gear is equal.
When it comes to balance, every fight takes place between 2 people with he same attributes. The only values that change are on the things that you wish to balance.
So for your rail rifle v plasma rifle scenario, at first you balance damage such that the plasma rifle wins, the range such that RR wins.

If you try to balance for everything this game would never get anywhere. Your manipulation of other variables such as damage profiles, tank type, cover and 3rd party support (which have all also been balanced independently) is part of the meta.

If you know someone uses a scrambler rifle and you keeping using shields, the scrambler isn't overpowered your dum. If however a scrambler beats a plasma at short range when you both have the same health and tank ratio in open flat ground and neither of you are moving, then it is overpowered.


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Kasote Denzara A Vulture 1919	Posted - 2014.03.17 07:18:00 - [1] - Quote Unnecessary? They've been needed for quite some time now. It's good it's happening. The only real headscratcher one is for the SMG. (lol, like really?) "Go ahead and dual tank. My Commando dual ganks." -Kasote Denzara I'm waiting for my G-I suit. It's what I want.
Kasote Denzara A Vulture 1919	Posted - 2014.03.17 07:44:00 - [2] - Quote - "Go ahead and dual tank. My Commando dual ganks." -Kasote Denzara I'm waiting for my G-I suit. It's what I want.
Kasote Denzara A Vulture 1919	Posted - 2014.03.17 07:54:00 - [3] - Quote Tweaksz wrote: They could have kept the nerf but increased RoF (Edit: RoF increase would entail a matching the RR's RoF or a slightly lower RoF), this is cqc we're talking about. I'll use hypothetical numbers that I squatted down and purged from my buttocks: Say a gun does 100 damage in ten seconds. That is ten damage per second. This gun can only shoot once per second. That means each bullet does ten damage. Let's cut the damage down to five damage per second. That is 50 damage in ten seconds. The gun can still only shoot once per second. Now let's increase the rate of fire to two shots per second. That is ten damage per second once again, regardless of the damage decrease. This last product has the same DPS, despite each bullet no longer doing ten damage per bullet. Rate of fire increase or decreases are just another way to change DPS. The current issue with all the rifles are that they do too much damage in too short of a time for a considerable TTK. Added: Though the Plasma Rifle's various variants are just, well, copies of the other races' own rifles, they shouldn't be expected to outperform Gallente's design. They are, after all, imitations. They are, yes, underwhelming, but that is more or less an acceptable outcome of what they are. I do remember the days where the TAC underwent what is going on with the Scrambler Rifles right now. "Go ahead and dual tank. My Commando dual ganks." -Kasote Denzara I'm waiting for my G-I suit. It's what I want.
Kasote Denzara A Vulture 1919	Posted - 2014.03.17 08:01:00 - [4] - Quote Tweaksz wrote: What i'm getting at is that, yes RoF does count as a DPS increase, though if we factor in range( which in TANK 514 plays a major role) said AR variant would still be inferior in certain aspects to the original racial rifle. Though the Plasma Rifle's various variants are just, well, copies of the other races' own rifles, they shouldn't be expected to outperform Gallente's design. They are, after all, imitations. They are, yes, underwhelming, but that is more or less an acceptable outcome of what they are. I do remember the days where the TAC underwent what is going on with the Scrambler Rifles right now. Tactical was the Scrambler Rifle, Breach was the Rail Rifle, Burst was the Combat Rifle. That's all they are. Imitations. In a sense, we've had all the racial rifles for a while- they were just poorly made by Gallenteans. "Go ahead and dual tank. My Commando dual ganks." -Kasote Denzara I'm waiting for my G-I suit. It's what I want.
Kasote Denzara A Vulture 1921	Posted - 2014.03.17 08:42:00 - [5] - Quote Nosid Katona wrote: So by your logic the other racial "Assault" variants should be just as 'underwhelming' compared to the AR as the AR variants are to them? How many times will I post this before this "they are cheap copies" argument dies. They are underwhelming. At least for the ones we have now. The Assault variant of the Scrambler Rifle is, well, laughable compared to their "normal" Scrambler Rifle, just as the Combat Rifle's "normal" variant is more efficient at the intended range. In a close up, "I can hug you" fight? The ACR will have the stronger edge over the CR, but why is the CR user even getting that close? The same applies to the Scrambler Rifle and Rail Rifle. If you didn't know, the Assault variants are the attempts to imitate Gallente's Plasma Rifle. Gallente is currently the only one that has one imitation variant of the other three races' rifles. Amarr lack burst and breach, Caldari lack tactical and burst, Minmatar lacks breach and tactical (in the current names of the Plasma Rifle variants). "Go ahead and dual tank. My Commando dual ganks." -Kasote Denzara I'm waiting for my G-I suit. It's what I want.
Kasote Denzara A Vulture 1921	Posted - 2014.03.17 09:00:00 - [6] - Quote Nosid Katona wrote: Underwhelming compared to the normal form perhaps, compared to the AR which they are imitating? Not at all. Just because the Scrambler, Rail, and Combat rifles all outperform their Assault variant doesn't change the fact that the assault variants are very close to if not better then the AR performance wise. While on the other side the AR variants not only are out performed by the AR but they are out performed by a HUGE margin by the rifles they are imitating. From highest damage reduction coming in 1.8: RR, SCR, CR, AR, SMG (which is still weird). Each and every variant of these listed weapons are having their damage reduced. For now, you can say anything you want about the CR's, RR's, and (possibly?) ScR Assault variant outpreforming the Plasma Rifle- I promise you that it's going to change in 1.8. All we are really doing right now, you and I, are pissing back and forth about things that are going to be changed, though I'm extremely sure the CR, SCR, and RR are going to lose a bit of popularity when they no longer do nearly twice the damage of the Plasma Rifle, if not more than that. I'm extremely positive, that against a shield tanker, the Plasma Rifle will devastate better (faster) than the Assault Combat Rifle can against an equally healthed armor tanker in 1.8. The problem right now with CR and RR is that they are armor killers with far too much damage being dealt to even be slowed down by shields. In 1.7, CR and RR are superior to every other rifle. In 1.8? We'll see. Am I saying the Plasma Rifle variants will find use in 1.8? No, I'm not. I really can't. People will use pretty much whatever they want to use. "Go ahead and dual tank. My Commando dual ganks." -Kasote Denzara I'm waiting for my G-I suit. It's what I want.
Kasote Denzara A Vulture 1921	Posted - 2014.03.17 09:27:00 - [7] - Quote Nosid Katona wrote: Your ignoring the fact that someone has already proven with math and the stats we have been shown that the ACR will still out DPS the AR. They are nerfing them all yes but they aren't addressing the problems. The gap that has formed between the AR and other rifles will grown incrementally smaller yes however the gap will still be there and noticable. Ps. Not to mention with the new Prof. The gap has the potential to grow larger. As armor gives x2 the health RR and CR Prof.V will eat through it once shields are down, while AR and ScR Prof.V will demolish shields but meet heavy resistance against armor. I don't know I haven't seen it in action so I'll reserve judgement on that point. The moment that the "they'll have higher DPS because of theory and no actual testing!" slipped out, I shook my head. It holds no argumentative value. The DPS arguments are just "what ifs". That's it. "What if". The greatest problem with DPS arguments is simply... they don't formulate human error. You can expect a brick to break a window when thrown, but it'll just do nothing if it never meets the window. "Go ahead and dual tank. My Commando dual ganks." -Kasote Denzara I'm waiting for my G-I suit. It's what I want.
Kasote Denzara A Vulture 1921	Posted - 2014.03.17 09:42:00 - [8] - Quote Nosid Katona wrote: I'm not really sure what your argument is here... They aren't changing how the weapons function or handle in anyway, only the damage they do and the skills and modules that affect that damage. Will the changing of the rifle stats make people miss or hit more? Am I missing something? So again the ACR will still out DPS the AR I don't need to test that to know it. Also how are DPS values 'what ifs'? It is a static number that doesn't change in any situation. The application of that DPS depends on the user, opponent, and situation but the DPS is still there. DPS is based around the ideal that every bullet will hit and every bullet will do the exact same amount of damage constantly. In Dust 514, that's incorrect. We have armor, shields, headshot bonus, headshot bonus while shielded, headshot bonus for only armor, distance of attacking, the skills of the attacker, the skills of the defender, modules of attacker, modules of defender, and various other variables. It can be static, but only after every possible situation and outcome are calculated. While people can "what if" these, application is still questionable. That's why DPS isn't a viable choice to use to argue. "Go ahead and dual tank. My Commando dual ganks." -Kasote Denzara I'm waiting for my G-I suit. It's what I want.
Kasote Denzara A Vulture 1922	Posted - 2014.03.17 09:52:00 - [9] - Quote Tweaksz wrote: Sure ignore the most prevalent thing in fps games. To say dps isn't important is like saying range isn't important either, the RR has more optimal than other rifles but of course that will never give anyone an advantage... DPS really isn't important. Do you know what "alpha damage" is? You can shoot at a heavy and do 1200 damage to him and he still lives. He can turn and shoot you once with a FG while you're shooting. You will die. "Go ahead and dual tank. My Commando dual ganks." -Kasote Denzara I'm waiting for my G-I suit. It's what I want.
Kasote Denzara A Vulture 1922	Posted - 2014.03.17 10:08:00 - [10] - Quote Nosid Katona wrote: Actually it is. While I agree there are far more variables to consider in DUST then your average FPS it doesn't mean DPS can't be used for balance. The modules affect both attacker and defender equally, so they should be balanced against eachother and the situation and build of attacker VS defender is a moot point as you can't balance around such situational statistics. Balance between tshould like weapons that function nearly identically should be achieved by using a baseline such as DPS, effective range, and damage profil in a static situation. Balance shouldn't be judged from equal grounds. It should be assumed that the attacker has the best while the defender has the worst. This is, after all, New Eden. I actually believe they attempted balance around the "equal ground" belief, which is both understandable and questionable. Questionable because, well, there's so many variables to assume. For example: Prototype gear, as much as people apparently hate to talk about it, is balanced. Around killing and defending other prototype. Advanced has less of a fighting chance, where standard has even less. In an ideal, completely same tier, situation, a lot of unbalanced things are actually balanced but only against itself. Gear aside, HAVs are a great example of this. (No, I am not a tanker. I'm not ready to lower myself that far.) 1.7's HAV blunders aside, the non-militia fights between the HAVs are pretty good. Am I saying that's good for everyone? No, not so much. AV is suffering indefinitely and it's showing with HAV spam. The arguments have been "because they're so cheap!", but that's only a minor part in the overall problem. With HAVs being the only thing keeping HAVs in check, that's the extreme imbalance. The fact that AV's chances to killing even moderately able HAV pilot is abysmal plays a part in this. Someone try to correct me. I'll tell you to look at 1.6. "Go ahead and dual tank. My Commando dual ganks." -Kasote Denzara I'm waiting for my G-I suit. It's what I want.

Kasote Denzara A Vulture 1924	Posted - 2014.03.17 10:18:00 - [11] - Quote Tweaksz wrote: Which of course has nothing to do with the discussion. Still run the numbers on alpha damage from the AR variants compare to original racial rifles, then do the same for ACR, AScR, ARR and compare to AR. You might be suprised. Edit: And if you have time to log in and try to state that dps has nothing to do with performance then you have enough time to try AR variants and see if you can match or slightly reach the performance( because they're obviously just mimics of racial rifles you obviously won't get the same performance) you would get with the original racial rifles. Scrambler Rifle is capable of dragging down anything in its sights with very little ease, regardless of shield or armor. The Tactical variant of the Plasma Rifle, however, struggles to bring down medium frames. The Combat Rifle is heralded as the king of CQC. The Burst Plasma Rifle is a party popper at best. The Rail Rifle decimates everything at range, being bettered only by very long range weapons. The Breach Plasma Rifle is "haha, look at this guy" whenever it is used. The Assault variants, well, I've found that they are rather situational. The only time an Assault variant has ever brought me down while I used the Plasma Rifle is that I was spotted first and shot at long before I could turn to react. That or the oh so lovely Sentinel carrying a light weapon. I don't even dual tank. The suit I usually use does have equal armor and shields, yes, but I do not put anything on it to increase these. The reason I have an upperhand over the Assault variants is because of Sharpshooter. ACR, I will admit, is the only Assault variant that will trounce the Plasma Rifle in the PR's optimal. ARR can possibly, but I've yet to run into someone willing to use that thing in Plasma Rifle range. I'm hoping 1.8 will give a little more favor to the Plasma Rifle. Added edit: I'm playing X-COM. Pick out something for me to name one of my guys, pl0x. "Go ahead and dual tank. My Commando dual ganks." -Kasote Denzara I'm waiting for my G-I suit. It's what I want.
Kasote Denzara A Vulture 1924	Posted - 2014.03.17 10:28:00 - [12] - Quote Nosid Katona wrote: You've completely gotten off point now and ignored my argument in its entirety. We are discussing balance between weapons that are comparable in every way, not Prototype VS lesser gear or the obvious imbalance of AV VS Tanks.it doesn't matter of it is a ADV AR VS an ADV ACR the imbalance is quite clear and the same goes for the PRO versions. Your idea of balancing on the idea that the Attacker has the best while the Defender has the worst is flawed in so many more ways then you seem to think balancing around equal ground is I don't see the point of pointing out its flaws. I have come to the conclussion that you obviously have no interest in balance and are either trolling or simply blind to the fact that the imbalances in question that are present now aren't changing and no amount of testing or "waiting and seeing" will change that. Balance around unequal grounds is the preference to me because this is New Eden. Do you know why the new players get mowed down within a second? Why their little peashooters tickle the older players? Do you even care? It's because somebody somewhere thought that everyone has the same gear. If this was Call of Duty, sure, balance around equal grounds. Battlefield? I don't see why not. But Dust 514? Where my shotgun can sneeze on people and blow them away because I skilled into it? Where my CR can snipe and two burst mediums? Are you serious? "Go ahead and dual tank. My Commando dual ganks." -Kasote Denzara I'm waiting for my G-I suit. It's what I want.
Kasote Denzara A Vulture 1927	Posted - 2014.03.17 10:40:00 - [13] - Quote Monkey MAC wrote: [ Do you do science? Or computing? Lets say I have 2 chemical reactions, using the same ingredients in the same ratios of quantity. But I get different results, how do I find out who is responsible? If you are using the same ingredients, given they are in the same amount, then how do you get different results? In order for that to happen, something different must happen before a different result happens. Is it in the same environment? Do the reaction happen in a different sequence? Do they (the ingredients) change properties over time? How does this even relate to Dust 514? lol... "Go ahead and dual tank. My Commando dual ganks." -Kasote Denzara I'm waiting for my G-I suit. It's what I want.
Kasote Denzara A Vulture 1928	Posted - 2014.03.17 11:17:00 - [14] - Quote Monkey MAC wrote: Becuse same ratios, not exact same quantities. So 1 reaction might have twice as much of everything. But assuming both reactions happen in the same conditions then one of the chemicals are responsible. So in order to find the culprit, you chamge 1 and measure results. Its anology for your argument about balance. You must always assume the gear is equal. When it comes to balance, every fight takes place between 2 people with he same attributes. The only values that change are on the things that you wish to balance. So for your rail rifle v plasma rifle scenario, at first you balance damage such that the plasma rifle wins, the range such that RR wins. If you try to balance for everything this game would never get anywhere. Your manipulation of other variables such as damage profiles, tank type, cover and 3rd party support (which have all also been balanced independently) is part of the meta. If you know someone uses a scrambler rifle and you keeping using shields, the scrambler isn't overpowered your dum. If however a scrambler beats a plasma at short range when you both have the same health and tank ratio in open flat ground and neither of you are moving, then it is overpowered. Arguably, to the whole chemical thing, you said "same ratio of quantities", so I can't be sure what the ratio is, only that it is exactly the same amount. It's normally safe to assume when something is measured in a ration, an equal one at that, that it is a 1:1 ratio. I didn't ask if the ingredients were actually 1:1, so it was (for me) to assume it as such. An alternative to this is that you also didn't state a specific ratio, only an equal one. In both cases, it's a communication error (I suppose). Back to Dust 514 things though. No fight in this game is equal. You argument is that fights take place between the same thing, whereas mine takes place between two differentiating things. You can say we have the same attributes, but that is only absolutely true between two same suits with same skills and same modules. A Gallente Scout, for example, is not on equal grounds with a Minmatar Scout. Are they both scouts? Yes, they are. Do they have the same attributes? No, they don't. Not in quantity. Unless you are referring to actual attributes, such as shield and armor (and so on and so forth). Then yes, the Caldari Scout and Minmatar Scout have the same attributes, but still not the same quantity. Since this thread has become about balance, we'll river dance our way over to that topic. In my arguments, I say that I do not wish for balancing around equal grounds. It would be nice, but it isn't the way I would want. Let's simplify everything right now. The Commando suit is capable of having exactly the same armor as it is shields. Let's create a theorized situation around this. Two standard Commandos, one has a RR, other has a PR. In a distance, the RR kills with PR Commando. Up close, the PR kills the RR Commando. This is balanced. This is equal grounds. Now let's complicate it. Throw a little New Eden into it. One's a prototype Commando (no modules), other is a standard, both carry a standard Plasma Rifle. The prototype Commando will win. This is still balanced, but less than equal grounds. Now theorize two standard Commandos, one with a prototype Plasma Rifle, the other with a standard. The one with prototype Plasma Rifle will open fire before getting as close as he did with the standard Plasma Rifle, because the Plasma Rifle's damage notably increased when upgrading. The one with standard did even less damage to the other one than when that other one was in prototype suit. This is still balanced, less than equal grounds. Now one is in both a prototype suit and has a prototype Plasma Rifle. The other is a standard user. The prototype walks away with only scratches while the other dies barely even able to dent the prototype's shields. This is still balanced. This is unequal grounds. The problem with the last is that the standard stood next to zero chance to even badly damage the other. The differences between the tiers is greater than people will admit, especially when suits come into play. The situations I depicted were, in my eyes, balanced. That is when like variables are being used. That is an ideal thought. It's understandable, it's logical. ... Isn't it? Or is it not okay that the prototype Plasma Rifle carries more damage over a longer distance, while the standard is reduced to tickling much sooner than the other? That is the imbalance between tiers. You can even go as far as to say that there is an imbalance with the tiers themselves. I want to balance around unequal terms. By this, if I haven't been clear, is around the tiers interacting with each other, not just itself. It being balanced around same gear... "equal grounds"... is what made the gap between tiers. "Go ahead and dual tank. My Commando dual ganks." -Kasote Denzara I'm waiting for my G-I suit. It's what I want.