DUST Search - Unnecessary Nerf Bat

All Channels

General Discussions

Unnecessary Nerf Bat

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Tweaksz NECROM0NGERS 25	Posted - 2014.03.17 07:16:00 - [1] - Quote Mainly on the AR variants. Your thoughts? Raptor Squad
Tweaksz NECROM0NGERS 25	Posted - 2014.03.17 07:17:00 - [2] - Quote Thoughts on the indirect AV nerf also. Raptor Squad
Kasote Denzara A Vulture 1919	Posted - 2014.03.17 07:18:00 - [3] - 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.
Tweaksz NECROM0NGERS 28	Posted - 2014.03.17 07:22:00 - [4] - Quote Kasote Denzara wrote: 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?) All other rifle variants have their decent side, now an AR variant for example let's say the CreoDron AR is going to have a slower rate of fire, shorter range, less damage, about same hip spread. The idea for cqc weapons is for them to have higher dps than longer range weapons, but CCP has made it clear you must abandon all necessary game design logic. Edit: I do agree on the SMG though in retrospect it is the same problem as the CreoDron AR- Kaalakiota RR. AR variants 1.8 - RIP
Nosid Katona HavoK Core RISE of LEGION 126	Posted - 2014.03.17 07:22:00 - [5] - Quote Kasote Denzara wrote: 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?) I think you've misunderstood what the OP was referring to. He meant the 'Blaster Rifle' variants like the TAC, Burst, and Breach. Not the racial ones like Rail, Combat, and Scrambler Rifles. Vae Victis Valor Vet, R.I.P MAG
Kaughst Nyain San Renegade Alliance 312	Posted - 2014.03.17 07:32:00 - [6] - Quote The thing is, there are no variants i.e Tactical Rail Rifle or Breach Scrambler Rifle to compare the AR variants to, while announced they would fall in line with appropriate ranges, damages and shortcomings. Arguably if you adjust the AR variant damage/range ect you mess with the logical place the future variants will have....once we do have all the variants I think that it would be easier to make radical stat changes to suit all of them more appropriately especially once they are placed in the hands of the players, much like they did with range changes on the rifles. "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."
Tweaksz NECROM0NGERS 29	Posted - 2014.03.17 07:39:00 - [7] - Quote Kaughst wrote: The thing is, there are no variants i.e Tactical Rail Rifle or Breach Scrambler Rifle to compare the AR variants to, while announced they would fall in line with appropriate ranges, damages and shortcomings. Arguably if you adjust the AR variant damage/range ect you mess with the logical place the future variants will have....once we do have all the variants I think that it would be easier to make radical stat changes to suit all of them more appropriately especially once they are placed in the hands of the players, much like they did with range changes on the rifles. I get what you mean though when you think about it variants are just one race's attempt to mimic another racial rifle. In that way I understand there could be underperformance. What troubles me is the incredible amount of obsoletion thanks to poor decision on the nerf . 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. AR variants 1.8 - RIP
Kasote Denzara A Vulture 1919	Posted - 2014.03.17 07:44:00 - [8] - 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.
Tweaksz NECROM0NGERS 29	Posted - 2014.03.17 07:47:00 - [9] - Quote Kasote Denzara wrote: Tweaksz wrote: All other rifle variants have their decent side, now an AR variant for example let's say the CreoDron AR is going to have a slower rate of fire, shorter range, less damage, about same hip spread. The idea for cqc weapons is for them to have higher dps than longer range weapons, but CCP has made it clear you must abandon all necessary game design logic. Edit: I do agree on the SMG though in retrospect it is the same problem as the CreoDron AR- Kaalakiota RR. They are getting damage reductions. That's it. Also, long range weapons can have higher DPS than rifles. It's actually pretty common. 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. AR variants 1.8 - RIP
Kasote Denzara A Vulture 1919	Posted - 2014.03.17 07:54:00 - [10] - 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.

Kaughst Nyain San Renegade Alliance 312	Posted - 2014.03.17 07:57:00 - [11] - Quote Tweaksz wrote: Kaughst wrote: The thing is, there are no variants i.e Tactical Rail Rifle or Breach Scrambler Rifle to compare the AR variants to, while announced they would fall in line with appropriate ranges, damages and shortcomings. Arguably if you adjust the AR variant damage/range ect you mess with the logical place the future variants will have....once we do have all the variants I think that it would be easier to make radical stat changes to suit all of them more appropriately especially once they are placed in the hands of the players, much like they did with range changes on the rifles. I get what you mean though when you think about it variants are just one race's attempt to mimic another racial rifle. In that way I understand there could be underperformance. What troubles me is the incredible amount of obsoletion thanks to poor decision on the nerf . 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. To reiterate, that is not to say those stats wont be change to increase relevancy as regardless of the rifle it should still have its place. What you may not expect is that should one variant be change, say the Tac AR, I.E a increase in damage, the RR may have to increase it's damage up from the Tac Combat rifle to the Tac Scrambler ending in a number of other possible problems. I am sure it's a complicated mathematical thing and eve concept that will be debated and nailed down with CCP's endless tweaking but it's hard to grasp from the community view point with the weapons we have and little variance that is available. Essentially we need to wait awhile until everything is in place to comment on what needs to be balanced. "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."
Tweaksz NECROM0NGERS 29	Posted - 2014.03.17 07:58:00 - [12] - Quote Kasote Denzara wrote: 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. 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. AR variants 1.8 - RIP
Kasote Denzara A Vulture 1919	Posted - 2014.03.17 08:01:00 - [13] - 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.
Tweaksz NECROM0NGERS 29	Posted - 2014.03.17 08:05:00 - [14] - Quote Kaughst wrote: Tweaksz wrote: Kaughst wrote: The thing is, there are no variants i.e Tactical Rail Rifle or Breach Scrambler Rifle to compare the AR variants to, while announced they would fall in line with appropriate ranges, damages and shortcomings. Arguably if you adjust the AR variant damage/range ect you mess with the logical place the future variants will have....once we do have all the variants I think that it would be easier to make radical stat changes to suit all of them more appropriately especially once they are placed in the hands of the players, much like they did with range changes on the rifles. I get what you mean though when you think about it variants are just one race's attempt to mimic another racial rifle. In that way I understand there could be underperformance. What troubles me is the incredible amount of obsoletion thanks to poor decision on the nerf . 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. To reiterate, that is not to say those stats wont be change to increase relevancy as regardless of the rifle it should still have its place. What you may not expect is that should one variant be change, say the Tac AR, I.E a increase in damage, the RR may have to increase it's damage up from the Tac Combat rifle to the Tac Scrambler ending in a number of other possible problems. I am sure it's a complicated mathematical thing and eve concept that will be debated and nailed down with CCP's endless tweaking but it's hard to grasp from the community view point with the weapons we have and little variance that is available. Essentially we need to wait awhile until everything is in place to comment on what needs to be balanced. Mebe try a simpler way as like I said variants are simply one race's attempt at mimicry: Tac AR- ScR Breach AR- RR Burst AR- CR ACR-AR AScR- AR but then again I agree that endless mindnumbing calculation must be made, and apparently CCP which i'm trying to believe in doesn't test their stuff enough for it to be ready. I wouldn't mind waiting more time if things could just be properly adjusted. AR variants 1.8 - RIP
Nosid Katona HavoK Core RISE of LEGION 126	Posted - 2014.03.17 08:07:00 - [15] - Quote Kasote Denzara wrote: 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. 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. Vae Victis Valor Vet, R.I.P MAG
Tweaksz NECROM0NGERS 29	Posted - 2014.03.17 08:08:00 - [16] - Quote Kasote Denzara wrote: 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. I understand that but for the sake of bonuses let's say the upcoming commando and assault bonus these weapons are just too irrelevant to even try using. I would prefer for variants to be removed then released when they are all ready. AR variants 1.8 - RIP
Tweaksz NECROM0NGERS 29	Posted - 2014.03.17 08:10:00 - [17] - Quote Nosid Katona wrote: Kasote Denzara wrote: 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. 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. I never once said the other assault variants should be just as underwhelming, atm all assault variants on other rifles seem to be just fine. IMHO of course. Edit: I never once mentioned cheap copies the other assault variants while still being competent and effective, to a certain extent they don't outperform the AR at cqc. AR variants 1.8 - RIP
8213 BIG BAD W0LVES Canis Eliminatus Operatives 1780	Posted - 2014.03.17 08:16:00 - [18] - Quote AV needs it's own limb on the skill tree. PLCs, Swarms, and FGs should get there own set of damage mods and specific skills. I like the nerfs, but until we actually play with te new weapons with the new suits, only time will tell. I expect to see 50 different threads complaining about the same thing on the forums within 24 hours. I also expect to see Nyain San figuring out and exploiting the next FoTM within 1 hour. I ain't got time for dat sh!t
Nosid Katona HavoK Core RISE of LEGION 126	Posted - 2014.03.17 08:25:00 - [19] - Quote Tweaksz wrote: Nosid Katona wrote: Kasote Denzara wrote: 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. 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. I never once said the other assault variants should be just as underwhelming, atm all assault variants on other rifles seem to be just fine. IMHO of course. Edit: I never once mentioned cheap copies the other assault variants while still being competent and effective, to a certain extent they don't outperform the AR at cqc. I was more referring to Kasote however on the subject of the 'Assault' variants I feel it is necessary to mention they are not fine. Take the Assault Comat Rifle for example. The ACB out ranges, has better DPS, and a better damage profile then the AR. While some MIT argue the AR has more potential damage per clip if one can't get close enough to apply said damage OR dies before even half of it leaves the gin it remains a moot point. Vae Victis Valor Vet, R.I.P MAG
Tweaksz NECROM0NGERS 29	Posted - 2014.03.17 08:34:00 - [20] - Quote Nosid Katona wrote: Tweaksz wrote: Nosid Katona wrote: Kasote Denzara wrote: 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. 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. I never once said the other assault variants should be just as underwhelming, atm all assault variants on other rifles seem to be just fine. IMHO of course. Edit: I never once mentioned cheap copies the other assault variants while still being competent and effective, to a certain extent they don't outperform the AR at cqc. I was more referring to Kasote however on the subject of the 'Assault' variants I feel it is necessary to mention they are not fine. Take the Assault Comat Rifle for example. The ACB out ranges, has better DPS, and a better damage profile then the AR. While some might argue the AR has more potential damage per clip if one can't get close enough to apply said damage OR dies before even half of it leaves the gun it remains a moot point. True. True. All the more reason to consider what is going on with the AR nerf in the New Eden "arms race" so to say. AR variants 1.8 - RIP

Daddrobit PFB Pink Fluffy Bunnies 594	Posted - 2014.03.17 08:37:00 - [21] - Quote Find more on the topic Here Here And Here
Alena Ventrallis The Neutral Zone 847	Posted - 2014.03.17 08:41:00 - [22] - Quote The ARs should have the highest DPS but the lowest range. So the breach AR should outDPS the rail rifle, but have lower range. The ACR should outrange the AR, but not outDPS it. Balance should be based on this idea. Best PVE idea I've seen.
Kasote Denzara A Vulture 1921	Posted - 2014.03.17 08:42:00 - [23] - 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.
Nosid Katona HavoK Core RISE of LEGION 127	Posted - 2014.03.17 08:46:00 - [24] - Quote Kasote Denzara wrote: 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). 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. Vae Victis Valor Vet, R.I.P MAG
Kasote Denzara A Vulture 1921	Posted - 2014.03.17 09:00:00 - [25] - 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.
Nosid Katona HavoK Core RISE of LEGION 128	Posted - 2014.03.17 09:04:00 - [26] - Quote Kasote Denzara wrote: 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. Yoyr 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. Vae Victis Valor Vet, R.I.P MAG
Tweaksz NECROM0NGERS 29	Posted - 2014.03.17 09:08:00 - [27] - Quote Kasote Denzara wrote: 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. But then why give in to futility, so I guess is CCP does whatever it freakin' pleases and we sit tight while we pretty much know for a fact how things will go down... To that I say. Hell No! I'd rather voice my discomfort that, i'm pretty sure other players that like the AR or are Gallente loyal to the bone, are feeling. On the off chance that maybe, just maybe, CCP gives a rat's furry ass what this game will turn into. AR variants 1.8 - RIP
Korvin Lomont United Pwnage Service RISE of LEGION 747	Posted - 2014.03.17 09:15:00 - [28] - Quote Kaughst wrote: The thing is, there are no variants i.e Tactical Rail Rifle or Breach Scrambler Rifle to compare the AR variants to, while announced they would fall in line with appropriate ranges, damages and shortcomings. Arguably if you adjust the AR variant damage/range ect you mess with the logical place the future variants will have....once we do have all the variants I think that it would be easier to make radical stat changes to suit all of them more appropriately especially once they are placed in the hands of the players, much like they did with range changes on the rifles. You can compare the Breach AR to the RR (Breach is Caldari base Rifle) You can compare the Tac AR to the SCR (Tactical is the Amarr base Rifle) You can compare the Burst AR to the CR (Burst is the Minmatar base Rifle) If you do so you see how bad the gallente are at mimic other racial variants. BUT if you compare the other racial assault variants you can clearly see how incredible good they are compared to Origin assault (Gallente). Gallente must really suck in adapting to other weapon principles while all other races seem to be able to make superior mimic weapons...
Kasote Denzara A Vulture 1921	Posted - 2014.03.17 09:27:00 - [29] - 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.
Nosid Katona HavoK Core RISE of LEGION 128	Posted - 2014.03.17 09:34:00 - [30] - Quote Kasote Denzara wrote: 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. 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. Vae Victis Valor Vet, R.I.P MAG

Kasote Denzara A Vulture 1921	Posted - 2014.03.17 09:42:00 - [31] - 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.
Tweaksz NECROM0NGERS 30	Posted - 2014.03.17 09:47:00 - [32] - Quote Kasote Denzara wrote: 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. 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... AR variants 1.8 - RIP
Kasote Denzara A Vulture 1922	Posted - 2014.03.17 09:52:00 - [33] - 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.
Nosid Katona HavoK Core RISE of LEGION 128	Posted - 2014.03.17 09:56:00 - [34] - Quote Kasote Denzara wrote: 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. 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. Vae Victis Valor Vet, R.I.P MAG
Tweaksz NECROM0NGERS 31	Posted - 2014.03.17 09:58:00 - [35] - Quote Kasote Denzara wrote: 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. 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. AR variants 1.8 - RIP
Monkey MAC Rough Riders.. 2202	Posted - 2014.03.17 10:01:00 - [36] - Quote Necessary, the rifles can be internally balanced later, but our first port of call should be getting the general TTK right first. Unless your a Computer Scientist don't tell me how Game Mechanics Work. Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior of the Trees Lvl 2.
Tweaksz NECROM0NGERS 32	Posted - 2014.03.17 10:04:00 - [37] - Quote Monkey MAC wrote: Necessary, the rifles can be internally balanced later, but our first port of call should be getting the general TTK right first. I know that but if CCP has the time to change the damage on rifles then they had enough time to see how said changes would affect all rifles including variants. AR variants 1.8 - RIP
Canis Ferox Ultramarine Corp 12	Posted - 2014.03.17 10:06:00 - [38] - Quote 8213 wrote: AV needs it's own limb on the skill tree. PLCs, Swarms, and FGs should get there own set of damage mods and specific skills. Interesting, this would require a heavier investment in skill points but presumably increase the potential for Anti Vehicular damage. I like the idea. It would mean not every player has access to powerful AV, but like the turrets on tanks, players could choose to invest in car-killing-capabilities. This would help counter the AV is too powerful argument. I also wouldn't mind AV costing more, although 1.7 brought on cheap tanks and quashed that argument. Basically I desire balance. This concept of releasing new weapons, equipment or suits or buffing old ones into OP-dom, to encourage their use, then nerfing the heck out of them so we're forced to try the new ones seems pretty counter-productive in terms of frustrating the hell out of the players. The rail rifle is ridiculous. It will probably be nerfed come 1.9, then it'll be put on the shelf with the AR and we'll be given a new OP toy. I still want to use my AR, not just because of the SP invested, but because it fits my play style (and if you tap the fire button it (still) is devastating,) but the Combat is just better. Are CCP trying to make it more even for newer players so they don't have to compete against people with level 5 everything in their chosen weapon - which if balanced would then make it imbalanced? If so, we need an Aim bot handicap system which makes Aim bot worse as you get more experience. That's a rubbish idea, oh: I know: ---FIX MATCHMAKING!!!!--- Then all the other issues will seem a lot less important! - Peace and retirement, C.Ferox
Kasote Denzara A Vulture 1922	Posted - 2014.03.17 10:08:00 - [39] - 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.
Monkey MAC Rough Riders.. 2202	Posted - 2014.03.17 10:10:00 - [40] - Quote Tweaksz wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: Necessary, the rifles can be internally balanced later, but our first port of call should be getting the general TTK right first. I know that but if CCP has the time to change the damage on rifles then they had enough time to see how said changes would affect all rifles including variants. Not necessarily when you consider the amount of stuff added its qute easy to see how they may not have had time for full rifle rebalancing. Also we only know of changes to damage values, other in-game mechanics may have been tweaked. Keep Calm, but keep at it, the Plasma Rifle is gimped against the other rifles, yes, but it is still grossly overpowered against the majority of niche weapons, until that is fixed I would say its unlikely they will balance the rifles internally, its just easier. Unless your a Computer Scientist don't tell me how Game Mechanics Work. Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior of the Trees Lvl 2.

Tweaksz NECROM0NGERS 33	Posted - 2014.03.17 10:17:00 - [41] - Quote Monkey MAC wrote: Tweaksz wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: Necessary, the rifles can be internally balanced later, but our first port of call should be getting the general TTK right first. I know that but if CCP has the time to change the damage on rifles then they had enough time to see how said changes would affect all rifles including variants. Not necessarily when you consider the amount of stuff added its qute easy to see how they may not have had time for full rifle rebalancing. Also we only know of changes to damage values, other in-game mechanics may have been tweaked. Keep Calm, but keep at it, the Plasma Rifle is gimped against the other rifles, yes, but it is still grossly overpowered against the majority of niche weapons, until that is fixed I would say its unlikely they will balance the rifles internally, its just easier. What I ment was instead of moving stuff just for the hell of it they should research what effect the changes would have thoroughly instead and releasing it at a later point in time where they can be sure or slightly comfortable that things won't go awry. No need for them to rebalance completely, if they are nerfing ALL the rifles then what's the point if it's still going to be unbalanced. AR variants 1.8 - RIP
Kasote Denzara A Vulture 1924	Posted - 2014.03.17 10:18:00 - [42] - 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.
Nosid Katona HavoK Core RISE of LEGION 129	Posted - 2014.03.17 10:23:00 - [43] - Quote Kasote Denzara wrote: 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. 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 if it is an 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. Vae Victis Valor Vet, R.I.P MAG
Kasote Denzara A Vulture 1924	Posted - 2014.03.17 10:28:00 - [44] - 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.
Monkey MAC Rough Riders.. 2203	Posted - 2014.03.17 10:29:00 - [45] - Quote Tweaksz wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: Tweaksz wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: Necessary, the rifles can be internally balanced later, but our first port of call should be getting the general TTK right first. I know that but if CCP has the time to change the damage on rifles then they had enough time to see how said changes would affect all rifles including variants. Not necessarily when you consider the amount of stuff added its qute easy to see how they may not have had time for full rifle rebalancing. Also we only know of changes to damage values, other in-game mechanics may have been tweaked. Keep Calm, but keep at it, the Plasma Rifle is gimped against the other rifles, yes, but it is still grossly overpowered against the majority of niche weapons, until that is fixed I would say its unlikely they will balance the rifles internally, its just easier. What I ment was instead of moving stuff just for the hell of it they should research what effect the changes would have thoroughly instead and releasing it at a later point in time where they can be sure or slightly comfortable that things won't go awry. No need for them to rebalance completely, if they are nerfing ALL the rifles then what's the point if it's still going to be unbalanced. Sorry misunderstood you there. Well youve got a choice nerf an overpowered set of weapons so that people stop bitching about them for a while, which gives you time to actually completly rebalance them and ALL of the associated mechanics. (Recoil, Mag Size, Reload Time, Zoom Fidelity, TTS, range, damage, ROF) Or you wait 3 months before making any changes, the rifles become more prelevant, player retention drops and people continue to whine making stupid demands that when 100's of people agree seem rather reasonable. All while your tryimg to balance these overpowered weapons, create new ones that aren't overpowered and build more mechanics into the meta of the game. From a developers point of view the first option is the best one, shut up the majority (keep em happy) deal with the fine tuning in piece. Unless your a Computer Scientist don't tell me how Game Mechanics Work. Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior of the Trees Lvl 2.
Monkey MAC Rough Riders.. 2203	Posted - 2014.03.17 10:33:00 - [46] - Quote Kasote Denzara wrote: 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? 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? Unless your a Computer Scientist don't tell me how Game Mechanics Work. Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior of the Trees Lvl 2.
Tweaksz NECROM0NGERS 33	Posted - 2014.03.17 10:34:00 - [47] - Quote Monkey MAC wrote: Tweaksz wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: Tweaksz wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: Necessary, the rifles can be internally balanced later, but our first port of call should be getting the general TTK right first. I know that but if CCP has the time to change the damage on rifles then they had enough time to see how said changes would affect all rifles including variants. Not necessarily when you consider the amount of stuff added its qute easy to see how they may not have had time for full rifle rebalancing. Also we only know of changes to damage values, other in-game mechanics may have been tweaked. Keep Calm, but keep at it, the Plasma Rifle is gimped against the other rifles, yes, but it is still grossly overpowered against the majority of niche weapons, until that is fixed I would say its unlikely they will balance the rifles internally, its just easier. What I ment was instead of moving stuff just for the hell of it they should research what effect the changes would have thoroughly instead and releasing it at a later point in time where they can be sure or slightly comfortable that things won't go awry. No need for them to rebalance completely, if they are nerfing ALL the rifles then what's the point if it's still going to be unbalanced. Sorry misunderstood you there. Well youve got a choice nerf an overpowered set of weapons so that people stop bitching about them for a while, which gives you time to actually completly rebalance them and ALL of the associated mechanics. (Recoil, Mag Size, Reload Time, Zoom Fidelity, TTS, range, damage, ROF) Or you wait 3 months before making any changes, the rifles become more prelevant, player retention drops and people continue to whine making stupid demands that when 100's of people agree seem rather reasonable. All while your tryimg to balance these overpowered weapons, create new ones that aren't overpowered and build more mechanics into the meta of the game. From a developers point of view the first option is the best one, shut up the majority (keep em happy) deal with the fine tuning in piece. I guess you're right, thanks to the exaggerated butthurt of a few hundred twelve year olds we get timely placebos instead of a cure. AR variants 1.8 - RIP
Kasote Denzara A Vulture 1927	Posted - 2014.03.17 10:40:00 - [48] - 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.
The Robot Devil Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 1991	Posted - 2014.03.17 10:40:00 - [49] - Quote 8213 wrote: AV needs it's own limb on the skill tree. PLCs, Swarms, and FGs should get there own set of damage mods and specific skills. I like the nerfs, but until we actually play with te new weapons with the new suits, only time will tell. I expect to see 50 different threads complaining about the same thing on the forums within 24 hours. *I also expect to see Nyain San figuring out and exploiting the next FoTM within 1 hour.* Them finding the FoTM is a good thing, it shows that those players like the game, are involved with theory crafting and want to win. Those are all good qualities but they usually make us feel bad. "One of God's own prototypes. A high-powered mutant of some kind never even considered for mass production." Raoul Duke
Monkey MAC Rough Riders.. 2203	Posted - 2014.03.17 10:40:00 - [50] - Quote Tweaksz wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: Tweaksz wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: Tweaksz wrote: I know that but if CCP has the time to change the damage on rifles then they had enough time to see how said changes would affect all rifles including variants. Not necessarily when you consider the amount of stuff added its qute easy to see how they may not have had time for full rifle rebalancing. Also we only know of changes to damage values, other in-game mechanics may have been tweaked. Keep Calm, but keep at it, the Plasma Rifle is gimped against the other rifles, yes, but it is still grossly overpowered against the majority of niche weapons, until that is fixed I would say its unlikely they will balance the rifles internally, its just easier. What I ment was instead of moving stuff just for the hell of it they should research what effect the changes would have thoroughly instead and releasing it at a later point in time where they can be sure or slightly comfortable that things won't go awry. No need for them to rebalance completely, if they are nerfing ALL the rifles then what's the point if it's still going to be unbalanced. Sorry misunderstood you there. Well youve got a choice nerf an overpowered set of weapons so that people stop bitching about them for a while, which gives you time to actually completly rebalance them and ALL of the associated mechanics. (Recoil, Mag Size, Reload Time, Zoom Fidelity, TTS, range, damage, ROF) Or you wait 3 months before making any changes, the rifles become more prelevant, player retention drops and people continue to whine making stupid demands that when 100's of people agree seem rather reasonable. All while your tryimg to balance these overpowered weapons, create new ones that aren't overpowered and build more mechanics into the meta of the game. From a developers point of view the first option is the best one, shut up the majority (keep em happy) deal with the fine tuning in piece. I guess you're right, thanks to the exaggerated butthurt of a few hundred twelve year olds we get timely placebos instead of a cure. What can you do? I dunno about you, but I rather be given placebos UNTIL there is a cure, instead of waiting in agony for a cure that could never come. Cheer up, speccing into Lvl 1 of anything don't cost that much, if you like the way the Assault Rifle plays, try the laser or Assault Scrambler. I personally can't wait to dust of my Mass Driver and Burst Scrambler Pistol again. Long live the Meta Unless your a Computer Scientist don't tell me how Game Mechanics Work. Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior of the Trees Lvl 2.

Tweaksz NECROM0NGERS 33	Posted - 2014.03.17 10:46:00 - [51] - Quote Not necessarily when you consider the amount of stuff added its qute easy to see how they may not have had time for full rifle rebalancing. Also we only know of changes to damage values, other in-game mechanics may have been tweaked. Keep Calm, but keep at it, the Plasma Rifle is gimped against the other rifles, yes, but it is still grossly overpowered against the majority of niche weapons, until that is fixed I would say its unlikely they will balance the rifles internally, its just easier.[/quote] What I ment was instead of moving stuff just for the hell of it they should research what effect the changes would have thoroughly instead and releasing it at a later point in time where they can be sure or slightly comfortable that things won't go awry. No need for them to rebalance completely, if they are nerfing ALL the rifles then what's the point if it's still going to be unbalanced. [/quote] Sorry misunderstood you there. Well youve got a choice nerf an overpowered set of weapons so that people stop bitching about them for a while, which gives you time to actually completly rebalance them and ALL of the associated mechanics. (Recoil, Mag Size, Reload Time, Zoom Fidelity, TTS, range, damage, ROF) Or you wait 3 months before making any changes, the rifles become more prelevant, player retention drops and people continue to whine making stupid demands that when 100's of people agree seem rather reasonable. All while your tryimg to balance these overpowered weapons, create new ones that aren't overpowered and build more mechanics into the meta of the game. From a developers point of view the first option is the best one, shut up the majority (keep em happy) deal with the fine tuning in piece.[/quote] I guess you're right, thanks to the exaggerated butthurt of a few hundred twelve year olds we get timely placebos instead of a cure.[/quote] What can you do? I dunno about you, but I rather be given placebos UNTIL there is a cure, instead of waiting in agony for a cure that could never come. Cheer up, speccing into Lvl 1 of anything don't cost that much, if you like the way the Assault Rifle plays, try the laser or Assault Scrambler. I personally can't wait to dust of my Mass Driver and Burst Scrambler Pistol again. Long live the Meta [/quote] sigh Yeah but there go my dreams of ever using gallente commando/assault bonuses and actually being effective. New Eden you cruel mother... AR variants 1.8 - RIP
Monkey MAC Rough Riders.. 2204	Posted - 2014.03.17 10:50:00 - [52] - Quote Kasote Denzara wrote: 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... 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. Unless your a Computer Scientist don't tell me how Game Mechanics Work. Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior of the Trees Lvl 2.
Nosid Katona HavoK Core RISE of LEGION 130	Posted - 2014.03.17 10:51:00 - [53] - Quote Kasote Denzara wrote: 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? Again your missing the point. This may be New Eden, but this fact is this instance is insignifigant and changes nothing in the discussion we are currently having. This isn't about noob VS vet, COD/BF VS DUST, or any of that other nonsense you continue to spew. This is about an inherent imbalance between two comparable weapons of the same tier, SP, and in the hands of equally skilled players. The fact remains; Weapon A shouldn't be all around better then weapon B in all situations, especially if both weapons serve the same purpose on the battlefield and function nearly identically. This is the case with the AR vs the ACR, the ACR outperforms the AR stat wise in 99-100% of the time in the AR's own role. This is an imbalance and must be adressed; The fact that this is New Eden and "HTFU" and all that other tripe remains moot. Vae Victis Valor Vet, R.I.P MAG
The Robot Devil Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 1991	Posted - 2014.03.17 11:02:00 - [54] - Quote Kasote Denzara wrote: 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... It is really like taking 10 different currencies from around the world and then telling the person to determine what it would take to make $13.46 using all of those currencies at once. If you have ever done algebra to determine the number of a certain coin in an amount then you know how difficult it would be to use ALL the different skills and mods we have in DUST. There is a good bit of difference between an unskilled AR and a perfect skill AR and that is only one weapon and it has a bunch of skills in it. Maths are fun. "One of God's own prototypes. A high-powered mutant of some kind never even considered for mass production." Raoul Duke
Kasote Denzara A Vulture 1928	Posted - 2014.03.17 11:17:00 - [55] - 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.
hold that Krusual Covert Operators Minmatar Republic 64	Posted - 2014.03.17 11:35:00 - [56] - Quote nerfing the creodon AR is fuking stupid there is no reason to use it, except if you like the sound of it
Beeeees KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 463	Posted - 2014.03.17 11:39:00 - [57] - Quote Kasote Denzara wrote: That's why DPS isn't a viable choice to use to argue. DPS calculation not an argument? In an MMO? In an MMOFPS? In a competitive MMOFPS? In a competitive MMOFPS in the EvE universe? -¦Sides, you grossly overestimate the margin of error, m8. TOLD514
Lorhak Gannarsein Science For Death 2149	Posted - 2014.03.17 12:51:00 - [58] - Quote Kasote Denzara wrote: Added edit: I'm playing X-COM. Pick out something for me to name one of my guys, pl0x. Get an Australian Mech Trooper (I wish there was an ocker voice. The Aussies speak American ) and name it Lorhak Gannarsein, please. Real men do it with missiles. "True says I have to let Lorhak yell at people in PIE GC from now on."
Cardio Therapy The Awesome Gang 4	Posted - 2014.03.17 13:21:00 - [59] - Quote After 1.8 comes I think Gallente weapons will die. Now the only used galente are shotgun and standard AR. Nobodi is using anymore plasma cannon, breach AR, Tac AR, Burst AR. After 1.8 nerf nobody will use the stabdard AR except the free and millitia. Even now GEK usage is declining every day in favor of Scr AR and RR. I personally moved from GEK to Scr AR and even the AR is maxed and the SCR not yet I do more kills with the SCR AR. Is it normal? shouldn't the standard Gallente AR be better the the SCR AR or Combat AR or RR AR, the same way that gallente variants are significantly underpowered to ther originals? Something is very wrong with 1.8 but obviouskly Gallente shoud be only scouts with shotguns!!! Also what will be done with the overpowered tanks? they are distroing every Ambush game now.
bamboo x Eternal Beings Proficiency V. 260	Posted - 2014.03.17 13:28:00 - [60] - Quote all this "omg damage nerf" bullshit is not going to affect medium and light suits that much you're still going to be able to kill them. especially if you're using the AR on a caldari. bamboo x (Heavy Machine Gun) you bamboo x (Ion or Scrambler Pistol) you bamboo x (Forge Gun) you

Tweaksz NECROM0NGERS 36	Posted - 2014.03.17 14:53:00 - [61] - Quote bamboo x wrote: all this "omg damage nerf" bullshit is not going to affect medium and light suits that much you're still going to be able to kill them. especially if you're using the AR on a caldari. Then again you're going to be a heavy and come 1.8 some heavies with a logi up their ass are going hard as frick to kill. AR variants 1.8 - RIP
Awesome Pantaloons Lokapalas. 304	Posted - 2014.03.17 14:58:00 - [62] - Quote Nope, needs to be done. RR and CR are way too powerful as they are. AR has been going out of style for a while so might as well. SMG and ScR I like where they are, but they aren't nerfed that badly. I think dmg mod nerf might be a bit overkill, but we shall have to see. I think it's good, on paper at least. "The Wrath of God is Immense. His Justice is Swift and Decisive. His Tolerance is Limited." -The Code of Demeanor
Tweaksz NECROM0NGERS 36	Posted - 2014.03.17 17:34:00 - [63] - Quote Awesome Pantaloons wrote: Nope, needs to be done. RR and CR are way too powerful as they are. AR has been going out of style for a while so might as well. SMG and ScR I like where they are, but they aren't nerfed that badly. I think dmg mod nerf might be a bit overkill, but we shall have to see. I think it's good, on paper at least. So I see you're into skipping vital parts of the conversation and saying something that makes no sense. AR variants 1.8 - RIP
Chunky Munkey Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 3523	Posted - 2014.03.17 19:13:00 - [64] - Quote Kasote Denzara wrote: 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?) We can't have it competing with the Magsec! Who will buy boosters otherwise? No.


Pages: 1 2 3 :: [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.