DUST Search - [Feedback] Rifle Changes Too Small To Be Effective (with math)

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

[Feedback] Rifle Changes Too Small To Be Effective (with math)

» 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 - 12 post(s)
Mobius Kaethis Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 1459	Posted - 2014.06.05 05:09:00 - [1] - Quote So the changes that were made to the rifles were too small to really lead to effective change in each of the effected weapon's relative power. The Gallente Assault Rifle got a 3% buff leading to the following changes: Duvolle GAR Previous Damage: 33 New Damage: 33.99 Previous DPS: 412.5 New DPS: 424.875 The Combat Rifle got a 2% debuff leading to the following changes: Boundless Combat Rifle Previous Damage: 29.7 New Damage: 29.11 Previous DPS: 594 New DPS: 582.2 And Just for comparison here are the stats for the Rail rifle and the Scrambler rifle: Kaalakiota Rail Rifle Damage: 51.7 DPS: 517 Visiam Scrambler Rifle Damage: 71.5 DPS: 841.17 <-- these are the raw numbers (71.5 x 705.88 / 60 and do not acount for heat issues during sustained firing) Looking at these numbers a few things are pretty clear. First that the GAR still has by far the lowest DPS even though it also has the shortest range. The result being that no one should be using this weapon right now. It is still useless. Secondly, the attempt to balance the combat rifle has done very little to reduce its total dominance of the battle field at almost all ranges. This is compounded by the fact that it is also the easiest of the weapons to fit (lowest CPU and PG costs of the light rifles) and is relatively easy to use, at least compared to the SCR. Finally, the SCR is still the most OP rifle in the game when used well but since most of us can't aim and the weapon has shorter range than the RR and the CR it is kind of a moot point. In order to bring both the CR and the GAR into balance they need to be altered more significantly. Giving the GAR a 35% damage increase over its 1.8 stats will raise its damage to 44.55 per shot and its DPS to 556.875. This is mind you still lower than the damage and DPS figures of the current CR and, given that the GAR has a much lower range than the CR, will allow the weapon to be competitive while not demolishing everything in sight. Reducing the CR damage by 10% from its 1.8 stats would bring the damage to 26.73 per shot and the DPS to 534.6. This change would give it a DPS that is only 4% lower than the GAR (which it out ranges) and 3.5% higher than the RR (which has a longer range). These changes would allow weapons to have the short range/high DPS --> long range/low DPS relationship that would give each its domain of dominance while still retaining usability at other ranges. TL;DR GAR still stinks buff it by 40% from 1.8 levels CR still far too good reduce its power by 10% from 1.8 levels Leave the RR, SCR, and the LR alone for now. Fun > Realism
Alena Ventrallis The Neutral Zone Psychotic Alliance 1273	Posted - 2014.06.05 05:28:00 - [2] - Quote Bravo, good sir. That's what you get!! - DA Rick
Racro 01 Arifistan 501st Knights of Leanbox 350	Posted - 2014.06.05 06:19:00 - [3] - Quote me likely. *Elite Gallenten Soldier*
DeathwindRising ROGUE RELICS 312	Posted - 2014.06.05 06:48:00 - [4] - Quote Lower the damage per shot a bit and increase rof for the AR stats you propose. Your dps should be the same. I'll do the math in a bit but, AR damage per shouldn't be that close to a RR.
Korvin Lomont United Pwnage Service RISE of LEGION 971	Posted - 2014.06.05 08:46:00 - [5] - Quote DeathwindRising wrote: Lower the damage per shot a bit and increase rof for the AR stats you propose. Your dps should be the same. I'll do the math in a bit but, AR damage per shouldn't be that close to a RR. A 10% increase in damage (36.3) plus increasing rof to 850 would yield a dps of 514.25 which is a reasonable start. Keep in mind that it's getting weapon profile and prof bonuses which increase shield damage by an additional 25% making anti shield dps 642.8125 which is more than enough to chew through even a caldari sentinel at record pace Basically, the current ballacs AR is what we should aim for. The issue however is CCP wants weapons that aren't full auto to do more damage because they feel they a harder to use. That's why the AR has always had the lowest dps with the RR above it, followed by the CR and SCR. to make CCP's point, imagine if all weapons had the same dps, regardless of weapon profiles or skills. everyone would use the AR or RR for either close combat or long range combat. why? because both of those weapons require nothing more than for you to aim and hold the trigger down til you run out of ammo. the combat rifle requires multiple trigger pulls and its scope hinders close combat. the scrambler rifle requires the most manual operation with the added hindrance of a heat mechanic. no one would use them over AR's and RR's. CCP balanced the rifles to promote variety as well on performance. Well how does the Burst Ar fit in this logic? Shouldn't this weapon not have way more DPS than the AR. Or why is the SCR soo much more powerful than the tac hell even the CR is more powerful than the Tac. CCP should just follow well established rules regarding DPS vs Range and that's it. Right now the Gallente Assault Rifle tree is under performing compared to the other racial options you have and this is simply and outright wrong and imbalanced. And you know what we told them again and again and again but CCP simply don't listen or they are ignoring our math (not really science) and conclusions. Instead they try to balance their ridiculous numbers by some not really working gaming mechanics... If this attitude won't change Legion will fail and the desaster we can see here will simply continue in Legion...

CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 2119	Posted - 2014.06.05 09:39:00 - [6] - Quote I inadvertently replied to a feedback thread in GD, didn't mean to. https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=164438&find=unread "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"

Arkena Wyrnspire Fatal Absolution 14071	Posted - 2014.06.05 09:53:00 - [7] - Quote A 35% damage increase is insane and unreasonable. You have long since made your choice. What you make now is a mistake.
Mobius Kaethis Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 1463	Posted - 2014.06.05 12:35:00 - [8] - Quote Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: A 35% damage increase is insane and unreasonable. I thought so at first too but please look at the DPS numbers and keep in mind the range profiles of the weapons. While a 35% increase to weapons damage is quite high it would actually give the AR only a 4% higher DPS than the CR which is only a marginal improvement. Additionally because the GAR's range is so short the CR would still have a large advantage over it in anything but the tightest quarters. CCP Rattati wrote: I'm forming the analysis as we speak, consisting of three components 1) comparable dps per class (std-adv-pro) between comparable styles breach AR vs rail rifle burst AR vs combat rifle tactical AR vs scrambler rifle AR vs assault variants 2) dps per PG/CPU invested 3) user experience/differentiating factors (clip, ammo, heat, accuracy, range) This will end in madness, spreadsheets and tears. I see that you are looking to compare varients of the the AR to the similar varients of other weapons. I will take a look at those numbers too and edit the intial thread to reflect balance that way. Personally though I would rather compare the base varients as that is what the range profile is based off of and what most players use. Fun > Realism
Mobius Kaethis Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 1463	Posted - 2014.06.05 12:43:00 - [9] - Quote DeathwindRising wrote: Lower the damage per shot a bit and increase rof for the AR stats you propose. Your dps should be the same. I'll do the math in a bit but, AR damage per shouldn't be that close to a RR. A 10% increase in damage (36.3) plus increasing rof to 850 would yield a dps of 514.25 which is a reasonable start. Keep in mind that it's getting weapon profile and prof bonuses which increase shield damage by an additional 25% making anti shield dps 642.8125 which is more than enough to chew through even a caldari sentinel at record pace Basically, the current ballacs AR is what we should aim for. The issue however is CCP wants weapons that aren't full auto to do more damage because they feel they a harder to use. That's why the AR has always had the lowest dps with the RR above it, followed by the CR and SCR. to make CCP's point, imagine if all weapons had the same dps, regardless of weapon profiles or skills. everyone would use the AR or RR for either close combat or long range combat. why? because both of those weapons require nothing more than for you to aim and hold the trigger down til you run out of ammo. the combat rifle requires multiple trigger pulls and its scope hinders close combat. the scrambler rifle requires the most manual operation with the added hindrance of a heat mechanic. no one would use them over AR's and RR's. CCP balanced the rifles to promote variety as well on performance. I have proposed similar balance methods before using ROF instead of base damage to boost the GAR's DPS. I actually like this response better because it is self limiting (higher DPS because of ROF = lower sustained fire) but you need to make sure you're only accounting for the base stats. If you start including the bonuses to shield damage for the GAR and the bonuses to armor for the CR you get into some much messier calculations (especially since the CR's bonuses and penalties are the best in the game right now) which make ballancing more accurate but much more confusing. Also don't forget, the GAR has the lowest range of the rifles which makes the ability to apply its DPS more limited, thus its need to have a higher DPS than the other rifles. CCP has also never responded to my requests to balance the GAR using increased ROF paired with slightly increased damage. I thought that simply increasing a single stat would be more appealing to them. Fun > Realism
BL4CKST4R WarRavens Final Resolution. 2736	Posted - 2014.06.05 12:59:00 - [10] - Quote A 25% MAX buff split between rof and damage will fix it. supercalifragilisticexpialidocious

DeathwindRising ROGUE RELICS 313	Posted - 2014.06.05 13:14:00 - [11] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: I'm forming the analysis as we speak, consisting of three components 1) comparable dps per class (std-adv-pro) between comparable styles breach AR vs rail rifle burst AR vs combat rifle tactical AR vs scrambler rifle AR vs assault variants 2) dps per PG/CPU invested 3) user experience/differentiating factors (clip, ammo, heat, accuracy, range) This will end in madness, spreadsheets and tears. tl:dr honestly? the whole thing is garbage. i suggest (possibly for Legion?) that we scrap all the variants and use a weapon fitting mechanic instead. then we just have the main 4 rifles (Assault, Breach, Burst, Tactical) Assault and Breach are mirrors of each other where they could even have the same dps, but the ar would have higher rof and the rr would deal higher damage per shot with lower rof. anyways though, you could mod each of those weapons with different fittings that each increase the weapons effectiveness in one area while reducing its effectiveness in another. each weapon would start at base stats at 5 in each area (damage, rate of fire, clip size, reload speed, range) with a certain amount of points or fitting that can be applied or used up. one way by using points is that you can only have say 5 points to invest in any area you choose. if you want more points, you have to take them from another area. advanced and proto level weapons would have higher base stats from which to start with. std ar damage is 30, adv would be 33, proto would be 36 for example.
Echo 1991 WarRavens Final Resolution. 302	Posted - 2014.06.05 13:16:00 - [12] - Quote AR just needs a bit more damage or an increased ROF. i'd like another damage increase but thats just me.
AmlSeb Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 83	Posted - 2014.06.05 13:28:00 - [13] - Quote I-¦d not increase any damage, I-¦d just decrease the RR, CR and SCR DPS so that it is lower than the ARs so overall TTK is increased. @AmlSeb on Twitter BPO exchange: https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1852003
Echo 1991 WarRavens Final Resolution. 302	Posted - 2014.06.05 13:32:00 - [14] - Quote AmlSeb wrote: I-¦d not increase any damage, I-¦d just decrease the RR, CR and SCR DPS so that it is lower than the ARs so overall TTK is increased. i know what ya mean, i just want the AR to be better.
Hawkin P Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 401	Posted - 2014.06.05 16:25:00 - [15] - Quote AmlSeb wrote: I-¦d not increase any damage, I-¦d just decrease the RR, CR and SCR DPS so that it is lower than the ARs so overall TTK is increased. Something needs to be done because a sub-machine of the same level as the AR is a better weapon at this point. A 3% damage buff to the AR was almost a joke and nowhere near enough. One warning about increasing the Rate of fire significantly, if you do that then clip size would have to increase as well. It might be simpler just to deal with damage at this point. Guns rated in killing power at close range before and after hotfix alpha. (Shotgun excluded because of extreme close range needed) 1.Combat Rifle 2.Rail Rifle 3.Sub Machine Gun 4.Assault Rifle 5.Magsec
Grimmiers 575	Posted - 2014.06.05 16:42:00 - [16] - Quote Instead of nerfing the damage of the combat rifle they just need to add a real delay between bursts. If you time it right, you can start the next burst as soon as the last one ends. Also when the game has a very low fps the burst has a greater delay than normal so hopefully adding a real delay would level the playing field.
Boot Booter Sinq Laison Gendarmes Gallente Federation 542	Posted - 2014.06.05 22:43:00 - [17] - Quote Sorry but correct me if I'm wrong... 1. The proto RR DPS is only 397.7 (51.7 damage with 461.53 rpm) 2. You have to include the delay between bursts for the CR. I don't think it's possible to achieve the full dps without the use of some special controller. If you pause 0.1 sec between bursts you are already down to 436.8 dps.. Go ahead and try to tap you fire button ten times in one second. It's not easy. For comparison the ACR has dps of 411 now. The SR is a bit harder to figure out but I don't really think too many people complain so they must be ok. Therefore, the AR is currently the DPS king (~425) as it should be. SMG Specialist
Spartan MK420 D.A.R.K L.E.G.I.O.N D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 481	Posted - 2014.06.05 23:04:00 - [18] - Quote Mobius Kaethis wrote: DeathwindRising wrote: Lower the damage per shot a bit and increase rof for the AR stats you propose. Your dps should be the same. I'll do the math in a bit but, AR damage per shouldn't be that close to a RR. A 10% increase in damage (36.3) plus increasing rof to 850 would yield a dps of 514.25 which is a reasonable start. Keep in mind that it's getting weapon profile and prof bonuses which increase shield damage by an additional 25% making anti shield dps 642.8125 which is more than enough to chew through even a caldari sentinel at record pace Basically, the current ballacs AR is what we should aim for. The issue however is CCP wants weapons that aren't full auto to do more damage because they feel they a harder to use. That's why the AR has always had the lowest dps with the RR above it, followed by the CR and SCR. to make CCP's point, imagine if all weapons had the same dps, regardless of weapon profiles or skills. everyone would use the AR or RR for either close combat or long range combat. why? because both of those weapons require nothing more than for you to aim and hold the trigger down til you run out of ammo. the combat rifle requires multiple trigger pulls and its scope hinders close combat. the scrambler rifle requires the most manual operation with the added hindrance of a heat mechanic. no one would use them over AR's and RR's. CCP balanced the rifles to promote variety as well on performance. I have proposed similar balance methods before using ROF instead of base damage to boost the GAR's DPS. I actually like this response better because it is self limiting (higher DPS because of ROF = lower sustained fire) but you need to make sure you're only accounting for the base stats. If you start including the bonuses to shield damage for the GAR and the bonuses to armor for the CR you get into some much messier calculations (especially since the CR's bonuses and penalties are the best in the game right now) which make ballancing more accurate but much more confusing. Also don't forget, the GAR has the lowest range of the rifles which makes the ability to apply its DPS more limited, thus its need to have a higher DPS than the other rifles. As to the skill involved in burst weapons like the CR I have never found it a more difficult weapon to use than the full auto weapons. People can mash the fire button quickly enough to make the CR essentially becomes full auto anyway. CCP has also never responded to my requests to balance the GAR using increased ROF paired with slightly increased damage. I thought that simply increasing a single stat would be more appealing to them. If you go tweaking rof, make sure you change the recoil/dispersion along with it or just increase the base dmg alone. I'd rather have more accurate bullets than random hits that do more dmg. Support Balancing scouts
castba Penguin's March 468	Posted - 2014.06.06 03:13:00 - [19] - Quote 44hp per round? You have to be kidding. Please refer back to the TTK issues pre 1.7 with the AR and three of the old complex damage mods. EDIT: Also, perhaps compare like for like? AR Assault CR Assault RR Assault (?) SR Tactical AR Combat Rifle Rail Rifle Scrambler Rifle
CHANCEtheChAn 0uter.Heaven 395	Posted - 2014.06.06 05:34:00 - [20] - Quote Mobius Kaethis wrote: So the changes that were made to the rifles were too small to really lead to effective change in each of the affected weapon's relative power. The Gallente Assault Rifle got a 3% buff leading to the following changes: Duvolle GAR Previous Damage: 33 New Damage: 33.99 Previous DPS: 412.5 New DPS: 424.875 The Combat Rifle got a 2% debuff leading to the following changes: Boundless Combat Rifle Previous Damage: 29.7 New Damage: 29.11 Previous DPS: 594 New DPS: 582.2 And Just for comparison here are the stats for the Rail rifle and the Scrambler rifle: Kaalakiota Rail Rifle Damage: 51.7 DPS: 517 Visiam Scrambler Rifle Damage: 71.5 DPS: 841.17 <-- these are the raw numbers (71.5 x 705.88 / 60 and do not acount for heat issues during sustained firing) Looking at these numbers a few things are pretty clear. First that the GAR still has by far the lowest DPS even though it also has the shortest range. The result being that no one should be using this weapon right now. It is still useless. Secondly, the attempt to balance the combat rifle has done very little to reduce its total dominance of the battle field at almost all ranges. This is compounded by the fact that it is also the easiest of the weapons to fit (lowest CPU and PG costs of the light rifles) and is relatively easy to use, at least compared to the SCR. Finally, the SCR is still the most OP rifle in the game when used well but since most of us can't aim and the weapon has shorter range than the RR and the CR it is kind of a moot point. In order to bring both the CR and the GAR into balance they need to be altered more significantly. Giving the GAR a 35% damage increase over its 1.8 stats will raise its damage to 44.55 per shot and its DPS to 556.875. This is mind you still lower than the damage and DPS figures of the current CR and, given that the GAR has a much lower range than the CR, will allow the weapon to be competitive while not demolishing everything in sight. A few things to remember here The CR (not the assault variant) can easily have its ROF reduced by 25%-50% in any match that has lag (Which has led me to no longer using it in PC, but using the assault variant instead). This gun has a dispersion (hip fire) skill that's basically useless as the thing shoots in a zipline at lv 0. The dispersion you get while ADS when you try to max out the ROF makes it extremely accurate at cqc but loses its charm at 40-75 m. With its high ROF, perfect hip fire, and mid range scope, and low negative shield bonuses (95%) and good armor bonuses (110%) it is the Obvious choice for slayers. The assault rifle should be the king of CQC as it is the only main variant of any rifle without a scope, but instead is outmatched CQC by both the CR and Rail rifle. The OP is correct in that the Assault rifle ROF needs a buff (more than damage), but a damage increase also might make the AR a bit OP. BECAUSE the GAR has no scope it is EXTREMELY accurate for the first 10-30 bullets of the clip (depending on your skill level in AR and Gassault). Thus if you are to get headshots on a target the AR can do massive amounts of damage to an enemy (The CR jumps which is hard for headshots, and the RR slow rate of fire hurt its chances for multiple headshots), the unfortunate truth of the GAR is the ROF is effectively too slow to out DPS the CR or RR with user skill headshots (The max Headshots I can get with the GAR before a target moves is 4-8). The rail rifle has now become a very good long range specialist weapon with the damage mod nerf and is very effective at holding down a sea of people at range. Honestly I'm more scared of it than CR users as anyone can use a CR (and be semi effective), while RR users tend to be leet. This is because the assault RR as is is just about completely useless competitively (much like the GAR variants). Also the RR is plagued by blue shielding and having no hit marker cues, making the weapon frustrating at times, but very powerful nonetheless. If used correctly, it can sit up high and keep an entire squad in check at lvs 4-5. But with its valiant range, it still seems to out cqc the GAR (as 1 clip can outlast nearly two GAR clips for continuous cqc. TL&DR OF THE 3 RIFLES The Rail Rifle is the king of long range and should be the go to high ground hold weapon. It should also be the weapon of choice for passive and defensive/support players that aren't always on the front lines. CQC should be outmatched by all rifles because of its tremendous range and should never be used withing 5-15 meters unless completely necessary. Thus the weapon needs a hip fire CCP super nerf (Like 50-100% dispersion penalty minimum) and a brief look at hit detection. The Combat Rifle is the king of mid range and its cqc rivals that of a laser rifle, but its bonuses and ease of use make it too effective a weapon. Due to the weapon nerfing itself in any form of lag, a damage or ROF nerf is unjustified, yet a ammo in the clip (54) nerf needs to be implemented, and also a cqc nerf of some kind needs implementing. No gun should have high ROF,DPS,and ammo in clip count. By reducing the ammo in clip (Preferably 30-45 bullets). This would make the weapon high DPS/ROF but in need of constant reload (wasn't that the reason for the high reload speed to begin with?). The Assault (plasma) Rifle with its short range should be master of CQC and the headshot king. This is not the case because of low DPS and killing potential (Armor tanking). Hip fire needs a 10%-25% tightening and the weapon needs a Balac's AR ROF to become competitive, and when headshots are not an option, hip firing takes over the fight. The Assault rifle used to be so good. Why you leave your Chromosome pride and joy so lonely CCP? Hmmm. The Meta is strong with this one...

Mobius Kaethis Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 1465	Posted - 2014.06.06 07:48:00 - [21] - Quote castba wrote: 44hp per round for a duvolle? You have to be kidding. Please refer back to the TTK issues pre 1.7 with the AR and three of the old complex damage mods. EDIT: Also, perhaps compare like for like? AR Assault CR Assault RR Assault (?) SR Tactical AR Combat Rifle Rail Rifle Scrambler Rifle Please notice that pre 1.7 we had no longer range weapons, all the current weapons out DPS the AR, and even in CQC the AR sucks relative to the CR and RR. Giving a boost to damage to bring its DPS into line with the other weapons makes it the CQC light king while still giving the CR the highest ROF in the game by a long shot, which matches up with EvE lore. As to your second note about comparing like varients I personally think that is foolish since the main varients are the ones most players use but CCP seems to agree with you (see the blue tag post in this tread) and others have already started other threads doing just that. While I do think such comparisons are interesting they are useless without finding some way to quatify the value of a weapon's max range so as to compare it to damage. Failing to do that will make the TAR look quite good when in reality it still sucks because it can't compete with the scram thanks to its extremely low range. The same can be said for the Breach AR vs the RR and the Burst AR vs the CR. Fun > Realism
Mobius Kaethis Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 1465	Posted - 2014.06.06 07:53:00 - [22] - Quote Boot Booter wrote: Sorry but correct me if I'm wrong... 1. The proto RR DPS is only 397.7 (51.7 damage with 461.53 rpm) 2. You have to include the delay between bursts for the CR. I don't think it's possible to achieve the full dps without the use of some special controller. If you pause 0.1 sec between bursts you are already down to 436.8 dps.. Go ahead and try to tap you fire button ten times in one second. It's not easy. For comparison the ACR has dps of 411 now. The SR is a bit harder to figure out but I don't really think too many people complain so they must be ok. Therefore, the AR is currently the DPS king (~425) as it should be. You are correct about #1. I realized today at work that I had done the calculations using the ROF from the ARR not the standard RR. I am editing the OP now. As far as 2 is concerned the ACR still has much higher damage than the AR which is a major issue since it has much longer range. EDIT: Looking at the correct numbers for the RR now reminds me of how important alpha damage is, which is why I stated earlier that I totally approve of a more balanced approach to buffing the AR which has a smaller buff to damage along with a buff to ROF. A 5% buff to 1.8 damage and an increase of the ROF to 800 would give the GAR a DPS of 462 which is higher than the CR (using your theorised numbers for practical non-modded controller DPS) and the RR without being stupid (a complaint of many about my pure damage buff model which is fair). Fun > Realism
Baal Omniscient L.O.T.I.S. 1585	Posted - 2014.06.06 12:10:00 - [23] - Quote Mobius Kaethis wrote: Boot Booter wrote: Sorry but correct me if I'm wrong... 1. The proto RR DPS is only 397.7 (51.7 damage with 461.53 rpm) 2. You have to include the delay between bursts for the CR. I don't think it's possible to achieve the full dps without the use of some special controller. If you pause 0.1 sec between bursts you are already down to 436.8 dps.. Go ahead and try to tap you fire button ten times in one second. It's not easy. For comparison the ACR has dps of 411 now. The SR is a bit harder to figure out but I don't really think too many people complain so they must be ok. Therefore, the AR is currently the DPS king (~425) as it should be. You are correct about #1. I realized today at work that I had done the calculations using the ROF from the ARR not the standard RR. I am editing the OP now. As far as 2 is concerned the ACR still has much higher damage than the AR which is a major issue since it has much longer range. EDIT: Looking at the correct numbers for the RR now reminds me of how important alpha damage is, which is why I stated earlier that I totally approve of a more balanced approach to buffing the AR which has a smaller buff to damage along with a buff to ROF. A 5% buff to 1.8 damage and an increase of the ROF to 800 would give the GAR a DPS of 462 which is higher than the CR (using your theorised numbers for practical non-modded controller DPS) and the RR without being stupid (a complaint of many about my pure damage buff model which is fair). The GAR does not necessarily need to have a higher DPS than the ACR in order to dominate it in CQC because the ACR already has much greater recoil and it's bullets begin to spread out in hipfire much more quickly. Having them close is fine, but the weapon whose bullets spread like a hybrid of the SMG and HMG after half a clip should probably keep a slight edge DPS wise since it's automatically going to be loosing a fair number of bullets to the wind if there's more than 10 meters between you and your target. I'm all for another GAR buff, I've even been using the Allotek since Hotfix Alpha (still weak btw but a nice change of pace), but you've got to take more than just range and DPS into account. Accuracy is almost just as important as DPS and a whole lot harder to balance around. Side note: The ACR's recoil CAN be worked around by burst firing 15-20 rounds at a time, but then there goes your DPS advantage. PSN ID: AlbelNox2569 Cross Atu for CPM1

CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 2208	Posted - 2014.06.07 11:38:00 - [24] - Quote A little chart I made. Hypothetical Max dps of Rifles Discuss. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"

Velociraptor antirrhopus Kang Lo Directorate Gallente Federation 148	Posted - 2014.06.07 11:41:00 - [25] - Quote Two words: Gun game. Read my sig as well. My thoughts on Hotfix Alpha: First I noticed a scout running from my AR. Then a heavy. Then a COMBAT RIFLE USER. CCP +1
Velociraptor antirrhopus Kang Lo Directorate Gallente Federation 148	Posted - 2014.06.07 11:43:00 - [26] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: A little chart I made. Hypothetical Max dps of Rifles Discuss. Mind = Blown. This chart makes me feel like I really need to get my ass into college. My thoughts on Hotfix Alpha: First I noticed a scout running from my AR. Then a heavy. Then a COMBAT RIFLE USER. CCP +1
Aeon Amadi Edimmu Warfighters Gallente Federation 5976	Posted - 2014.06.07 12:40:00 - [27] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: A little chart I made. Hypothetical Max dps of Rifles Discuss. What are the axes? They lack titles Useful Links Aeon Amadi for CPM1
SponkSponkSponk The Southern Legion Final Resolution. 865	Posted - 2014.06.07 12:46:00 - [28] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: A little chart I made. Hypothetical Max dps of Rifles Discuss. Without labels on the axes, it's pretty meaningless. Dust/Eve transfers

CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 2209	Posted - 2014.06.07 12:52:00 - [29] - Quote It's an IQ test as well x-axis is obviously range, and y-axis is pretty obviously just the grouping I described in my earlier post "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"

Oxskull Duncarino ACME SPECIAL FORCES RISE of LEGION 574	Posted - 2014.06.07 12:56:00 - [30] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: A little chart I made. Hypothetical Max dps of Rifles Discuss. What are the axes? They lack titles On the Y axis number 1 is all the high RPM full auto rifles, 2 is all the lower RPM full auto rifles(breach), 3 is all the burst fire rifles, and 4 is all the semi auto rifles. On the X axis the numbers mean gibberish to me aside from just being used to help space the circles Rattati used. Maybe Rattati can elaborate! Circle colour is explained. Circle size from what I can see is just to differentiate between racial variants, which the colour already does. You've been very active with the community to say the least Rattati, which is excellent, but I expected alot more than what you put since you've stated before that graphs are more your bread and butter than text data. What you've put up is exactly what I've seen first year college students hand up in reports before they've properly got to grasp with what they're doing, and I'm sure that's not your intention. My apologies in advance if I'm just interpreting the graph wrong. "Science has not yet taught us if madness is or is not the sublimity of the intelligence." -- Edgar Allan Poe


CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 2209	Posted - 2014.06.07 13:00:00 - [31] - Quote Oxskull Duncarino wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: A little chart I made. Hypothetical Max dps of Rifles Discuss. What are the axes? They lack titles On the Y axis number 1 is all the high RPM full auto rifles, 2 is all the lower RPM full auto rifles(breach), 3 is all the burst fire rifles, and 4 is all the semi auto rifles. On the X axis the numbers mean gibberish to me aside from just being used to help space the circles Rattati used. Maybe Rattati can elaborate! Circle colour is explained. Circle size from what I can see is just to differentiate between racial variants, which the colour already does. You've been very active with the community to say the least Rattati, which is excellent, but I expected alot more than what you put since you've stated before that graphs are more your bread and butter than text data. What you've put up is exactly what I've seen first year college students hand up in reports before they've properly got to grasp with what they're doing, and I'm sure that's not your intention. My apologies in advance if I'm just interpreting the graph wrong. Smart college students, as this is the perfect representation of the status of rifles in DUST 514 and contains all the necessary information to fix them. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"

Oxskull Duncarino ACME SPECIAL FORCES RISE of LEGION 574	Posted - 2014.06.07 13:11:00 - [32] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Oxskull Duncarino wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: A little chart I made. Hypothetical Max dps of Rifles Discuss. What are the axes? They lack titles On the Y axis number 1 is all the high RPM full auto rifles, 2 is all the lower RPM full auto rifles(breach), 3 is all the burst fire rifles, and 4 is all the semi auto rifles. On the X axis the numbers mean gibberish to me aside from just being used to help space the circles Rattati used. Maybe Rattati can elaborate! Circle colour is explained. Circle size from what I can see is just to differentiate between racial variants, which the colour already does. You've been very active with the community to say the least Rattati, which is excellent, but I expected alot more than what you put since you've stated before that graphs are more your bread and butter than text data. What you've put up is exactly what I've seen first year college students hand up in reports before they've properly got to grasp with what they're doing, and I'm sure that's not your intention. My apologies in advance if I'm just interpreting the graph wrong. Smart college students, as this is the perfect representation of the status of rifles in DUST 514 and contains all the necessary information to fix them. Sorry I tend to nitpick You've totally separated out the breach weapons due to the fact that the proto breach plasma rifle does less damage than the basic rail rifle so therefore your placing makes sense. But then you have the burst varient of the plasma rifle ahead of the combat rifle on the X-Axis even though it does less damage than its counterpart combat rifle. And then you have the single fire rifles overlapping even though they're in the same position as the breach, ie. the plasma variants proto does less damage than the basic scrambler. I agree that the data needed is there but is to me laid out in a very confusing manner. I'll put it down to my area of work utilising graphs differently to yours "Science has not yet taught us if madness is or is not the sublimity of the intelligence." -- Edgar Allan Poe
Harpyja Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 1830	Posted - 2014.06.07 13:18:00 - [33] - Quote Why can't there just be a linear relationship between range and DPS? More range = less DPS. A rifle that outranges another rifle should not deal more or a comparable amount of DPS. Another solution would be to just add falloff for close ranges as well, like the laser rifle. That will push players to use the rifles as intended (rails at long range instead of CQC for example) while keeping their DPS, as they'll suffer outside of their intended uses. I'm just surprised that these rifles have even made it into the game when they can outrange other rifles and have comparable or more DPS. That's just a big no-no. "By His light, and His will" - The Scriptures, Gheinok the First, 12:32

CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 2210	Posted - 2014.06.07 13:48:00 - [34] - Quote Exactly, I am just trolling on a saturday evening. Forgive me. This allows us to identify and rectify the damage versus range curves, as well as normalize each path, IE strongly buff TAR's, somewhet BRAR's and BAR's, and play a little with the Assault variants. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"


CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 2210	Posted - 2014.06.07 13:50:00 - [35] - Quote Harpyja wrote: Why can't there just be a linear relationship between range and DPS? More range = less DPS. A rifle that outranges another rifle should not deal more or a comparable amount of DPS. Another solution would be to just add falloff for close ranges as well, like the laser rifle. That will push players to use the rifles as intended (rails at long range instead of CQC for example) while keeping their DPS, as they'll suffer outside of their intended uses. I'm just surprised that these rifles have even made it into the game when they can outrange other rifles and have comparable or more DPS. That's just a big no-no. We can't just assume that DPS is king, the SR has overheat and charge mechanics etc. But some variants are clearly in need of a buff and we have all known that for too long. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"


CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 2210	Posted - 2014.06.07 13:50:00 - [36] - Quote Oxskull Duncarino wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Oxskull Duncarino wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: A little chart I made. Hypothetical Max dps of Rifles Discuss. What are the axes? They lack titles On the Y axis number 1 is all the high RPM full auto rifles, 2 is all the lower RPM full auto rifles(breach), 3 is all the burst fire rifles, and 4 is all the semi auto rifles. On the X axis the numbers mean gibberish to me aside from just being used to help space the circles Rattati used. Maybe Rattati can elaborate! Circle colour is explained. Circle size from what I can see is just to differentiate between racial variants, which the colour already does. You've been very active with the community to say the least Rattati, which is excellent, but I expected alot more than what you put since you've stated before that graphs are more your bread and butter than text data. What you've put up is exactly what I've seen first year college students hand up in reports before they've properly got to grasp with what they're doing, and I'm sure that's not your intention. My apologies in advance if I'm just interpreting the graph wrong. Smart college students, as this is the perfect representation of the status of rifles in DUST 514 and contains all the necessary information to fix them. Edit - Apologies for coming across as a douche. If the X-axis is range, the graph makes sense even if the reality of the damage ingame doesn't. As Harpyja said below, and many others before him, range and damage should work in inverse with each other. Shorter range more damage verses longer range less damage. And the size of the bubbles is the dps, large bubbles high dps. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"

Aeon Amadi Edimmu Warfighters Gallente Federation 5976	Posted - 2014.06.07 14:13:00 - [37] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Exactly, I am just trolling on a saturday evening. Forgive me. This allows us to identify and rectify the damage versus range curves, as well as normalize each path, IE strongly buff TAR's, somewhet BRAR's and BAR's, and play a little with the Assault variants. Might want to tone it down just a tad. Not trying to tell you how to live your life but the average player isn't going to derive values from 6,000 - 11,000 as range. Just saying, I'm smart enough to derive that 6,000 is (what I assume to be) 60 meters after you tell me that it's range... but at first glance it's not quite so obvious to a guy who spends his time creating and admiring graphical design more than programming and coding. EDIT: Or perhaps it's just my being used to the way things are in America. Useful Links Aeon Amadi for CPM1
Arkena Wyrnspire Fatal Absolution 14179	Posted - 2014.06.07 14:26:00 - [38] - Quote It seems painfully apparent along the various rows of that table that there is no DPS tradeoff for range. Also, 'theoretical maximum DPS'? I notice the burst weapons (CR and burst AR) are both treated as if there's no burst delay. I'm pretty sure there's a burst delay - looking at the SDE: Burst assault rifle: m_fBurstInterval0.08 Combat rifle: m_fBurstInterval0.06 This is also noticeable whilst using the weapons - they have a 'rhythm' to them as a result. The top row on first glance shows horrendous skew, but it's not like normal humans tap the trigger fast enough for the SCR to max out on DPS. That said, the overheat isn't really much more of a drawback than the clip size on the TAR. I'd argue that the clip size is actually more restrictive as you need to reload while the SCR can cool down for short moment before finishing off a target. The overheat allows a similar number of shots off before overheating to the TAR clip - but overheating doesn't necessarily happen if you're smart about it. You have long since made your choice. What you make now is a mistake.
Aeon Amadi Edimmu Warfighters Gallente Federation 5976	Posted - 2014.06.07 14:42:00 - [39] - Quote Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: It seems painfully apparent along the various rows of that table that there is no DPS tradeoff for range. Also, 'theoretical maximum DPS'? I notice the burst weapons (CR and burst AR) are both treated as if there's no burst delay. I'm pretty sure there's a burst delay - looking at the SDE: Burst assault rifle: m_fBurstInterval0.08 Combat rifle: m_fBurstInterval0.06 This is also noticeable whilst using the weapons - they have a 'rhythm' to them as a result. The top row on first glance shows horrendous skew, but it's not like normal humans tap the trigger fast enough for the SCR to max out on DPS. That said, the overheat isn't really much more of a drawback than the clip size on the TAR. I'd argue that the clip size is actually more restrictive as you need to reload while the SCR can cool down for short moment before finishing off a target. The overheat allows a similar number of shots off before overheating to the TAR clip - but overheating doesn't necessarily happen if you're smart about it. Been preaching about this since last year. Although a more recent post sums up my thoughts: https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2194365#post2194365 Useful Links Aeon Amadi for CPM1
Arkena Wyrnspire Fatal Absolution 14182	Posted - 2014.06.07 14:48:00 - [40] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: Been preaching about this since last year. Although a more recent post sums up my thoughts: https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2194365#post2194365 I'm not really a fan of the TAR and breach being the ones 'euthanised' though. If some variants have to go, I think it should be the ones that don't really have as much of a unique role. The breach is just another full-auto rifle with a different RoF:damage per shot balance. The burst isn't much different from the combat rifle other than just having worse damage/RoF - and a tweaked balance of them. The TAR, though, could actually serve a role as an ease-of-use semi-automatic. The SCR performs admirably well in the semi-automatic category but with the overheat it's a little different from what I would say is a 'normal' semi-auto. Of course, the overheat barely counts as a drawback when being compared to the TAR on account of the pitiful clip size that the TAR has, but the point still stands - if the TAR wasn't in a position where it was flat out worse than the SCR then of all the variants it has the most potential to fill its own role. You have long since made your choice. What you make now is a mistake.

Aeon Amadi Edimmu Warfighters Gallente Federation 5976	Posted - 2014.06.07 15:06:00 - [41] - Quote Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: Been preaching about this since last year. Although a more recent post sums up my thoughts: https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2194365#post2194365 I'm not really a fan of the TAR and breach being the ones 'euthanised' though. If some variants have to go, I think it should be the ones that don't really have as much of a unique role. The breach is just another full-auto rifle with a different RoF:damage per shot balance. The burst isn't much different from the combat rifle other than just having worse damage/RoF - and a tweaked balance of them. The TAR, though, could actually serve a role as an ease-of-use semi-automatic. The SCR performs admirably well in the semi-automatic category but with the overheat it's a little different from what I would say is a 'normal' semi-auto. Of course, the overheat barely counts as a drawback when being compared to the TAR on account of the pitiful clip size that the TAR has, but the point still stands - if the TAR wasn't in a position where it was flat out worse than the SCR then of all the variants it has the most potential to fill its own role. The 'euthanized' bit was addressed later on in the thread but I'll elaborate my position a bit better so there's no further confusion. The reason I said they should be euthanized is because if we buff them, it's a long-shot that we get all three of the variants right on the first roll. It's probably going to take a few hotfixes to get them to where they're both viable and well-balanced. If there's a strong desire to keep them and people are comfortable knowing that there's a likely chance it's not going to be perfect on the first iteration, then sure - be my guest. Useful Links Aeon Amadi for CPM1

CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 2215	Posted - 2014.06.07 15:36:00 - [42] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Exactly, I am just trolling on a saturday evening. Forgive me. This allows us to identify and rectify the damage versus range curves, as well as normalize each path, IE strongly buff TAR's, somewhet BRAR's and BAR's, and play a little with the Assault variants. Might want to tone it down just a tad. Not trying to tell you how to live your life but the average player isn't going to derive values from 6,000 - 11,000 as range. Just saying, I'm smart enough to derive that 6,000 is (what I assume to be) 60 meters after you tell me that it's range... but at first glance it's not quite so obvious to a guy who spends his time creating and admiring graphical design more than programming and coding. EDIT: Or perhaps it's just my being used to the way things are in America. Less about the numbers than the pattern, AR short range and RR long range, left to right, that sort of thing. How are things different in America? "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"

Aeon Amadi Edimmu Warfighters Gallente Federation 5976	Posted - 2014.06.07 15:42:00 - [43] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Exactly, I am just trolling on a saturday evening. Forgive me. This allows us to identify and rectify the damage versus range curves, as well as normalize each path, IE strongly buff TAR's, somewhet BRAR's and BAR's, and play a little with the Assault variants. Might want to tone it down just a tad. Not trying to tell you how to live your life but the average player isn't going to derive values from 6,000 - 11,000 as range. Just saying, I'm smart enough to derive that 6,000 is (what I assume to be) 60 meters after you tell me that it's range... but at first glance it's not quite so obvious to a guy who spends his time creating and admiring graphical design more than programming and coding. EDIT: Or perhaps it's just my being used to the way things are in America. Less about the numbers than the pattern, AR short range and RR long range, left to right, that sort of thing. How are things different in America? Well, there's only a completely different system of measurement for starters, lol. Average American, at least here in the south, still measure rifle ranges in Yards. What I was trying to convey is that, at first glance, I'm not going to think of rifle ranges being measured in units of centimeters. Given the amount of confusion that was being conveyed by others in the thread, I'd say it's a pretty common trait among the player-base thus far Might not be quite as obvious as you'd think. At first it just looked like a bunch of numbers scaled from 6000-11000. Useful Links Aeon Amadi for CPM1

CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 2215	Posted - 2014.06.07 15:49:00 - [44] - Quote The Unreal 3 engine is not in yards "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"

Oxskull Duncarino ACME SPECIAL FORCES RISE of LEGION 576	Posted - 2014.06.07 15:49:00 - [45] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Exactly, I am just trolling on a saturday evening. Forgive me. This allows us to identify and rectify the damage versus range curves, as well as normalize each path, IE strongly buff TAR's, somewhet BRAR's and BAR's, and play a little with the Assault variants. Lol, a little trolling is always good Much as it wasn't long after midday for me when I posted, my brain was still asleep when looking at the graph. My bad for jumping in both feet first While there are individual balancing characteristics of each racial weapon variant outside of their DPS, and I saw you mentioned that in one of the above posts, your graph shows the disparity that's been around for too long between each weapon path. I love running my adv. Gal. commando with a Gek38 as primary, but much as I've tried, none of the other plasma rifle variants have been of good enough use to support it in a secondary role, with non Gal. weapons becoming the better secondary even without them able to take advantage of the 10% damage bonus. The Tac and the burst would be the two that I would really like to have in a position that they would join the shotgun and plasma cannon as viable choices. Just increasing the damage of the Tac close to its equivalent scrambler rifle could be the perfect balance. The Scrambler rifle would have the very high potential DPS, large magazine, and charged shot, balanced out by its overheat function and large difference in damage multipliers for armour/shield damage. The Tac would probably need a few other tweaks after the damage increase, but should be close to being balanced with its high damage balanced by its low potential RPM, high recoil, low magazine size, shorter range, and the most view restricting scope in the game. The breach would have a total revamp though from its present state. Since it is supposed to be the Gal. attempt at copying the Cal. rail rifle, I'd give it increased damage, bad hipfire accuracy, and the same range as the Tac. I'd give it a scope too, but I know you're trying to keep the changes simple so that'd be a no go. "Science has not yet taught us if madness is or is not the sublimity of the intelligence." -- Edgar Allan Poe
Cat Merc Onslaught Inc RISE of LEGION 10178	Posted - 2014.06.07 15:55:00 - [46] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: The Unreal 3 engine is not in yards So is the UE3 engine in centimeters? Because the confusion was about why you weren't using meters. Feline overlord of all humans - CAT MERC
Aeon Amadi Edimmu Warfighters Gallente Federation 5977	Posted - 2014.06.07 15:59:00 - [47] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: The Unreal 3 engine is not in yards Just... Nevermind, lol. Going to request that we label the axes in the future as to not cause unnecessary confusion. Still have people asking me what the axes are. Useful Links Aeon Amadi for CPM1
Oxskull Duncarino ACME SPECIAL FORCES RISE of LEGION 576	Posted - 2014.06.07 16:06:00 - [48] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Exactly, I am just trolling on a saturday evening. Forgive me. This allows us to identify and rectify the damage versus range curves, as well as normalize each path, IE strongly buff TAR's, somewhet BRAR's and BAR's, and play a little with the Assault variants. Might want to tone it down just a tad. Not trying to tell you how to live your life but the average player isn't going to derive values from 6,000 - 11,000 as range. Just saying, I'm smart enough to derive that 6,000 is (what I assume to be) 60 meters after you tell me that it's range... but at first glance it's not quite so obvious to a guy who spends his time creating and admiring graphical design more than programming and coding. EDIT: Or perhaps it's just my being used to the way things are in America. Less about the numbers than the pattern, AR short range and RR long range, left to right, that sort of thing. How are things different in America? Try this for a graph of the difference http://tinypic.com/r/4q3qfk/8 "Science has not yet taught us if madness is or is not the sublimity of the intelligence." -- Edgar Allan Poe

CCP Logibro C C P C C P Alliance 7960	Posted - 2014.06.07 16:31:00 - [49] - Quote Cat Merc wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: The Unreal 3 engine is not in yards So is the UE3 engine in centimeters? Because the confusion was about why you weren't using meters. 100 unreal units = 1 meter in DUST, so practically yes. The reason this graph is in unreal units rather than meters is that the effective range is stored in the DB as unreal units, and this is pulling straight from there. CCP Logibro // Patron Saint of Logistics // Distributor of Nanites (a¦á_a¦á)

Arkena Wyrnspire Fatal Absolution 14194	Posted - 2014.06.07 16:39:00 - [50] - Quote So the confusing graph aside, have you blues gotten any new ideas from this thread so far? You have long since made your choice. What you make now is a mistake.

CJ Martino The dyst0pian Corporation Zero-Day 0	Posted - 2014.06.07 19:08:00 - [51] - Quote Try this for a graph of the difference http://tinypic.com/r/4q3qfk/8 I don't see whats so confusing about the left side. It looks logical to me. P.S. Sorry for not posting correctly. I have lurked for months, but this is my first time saying anything.
Mobius Kaethis Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 1466	Posted - 2014.06.07 20:31:00 - [52] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: A little chart I made. Hypothetical Max dps of Rifles Discuss. Thank you for the graph. Here is the problem with the way the rilfes currently work, which your graph perfectly illustrates. While weapons of the same type (assault, breach, tac, etc...) all have approximately the same DPS (the SCR is the exception here and it is pretty far out of whack) they do not have the same range. Sure, my proto AR has almost the same DPS as a proto ACR but the ACR has much longer effective and optimal range making it much more usuable. The same can be said when comparing the AR to the ARR or the ASCR. Why did you try to make all the weapons of one fire type have the same DPS regardless of the range they could apply that damage at? Given my druthers weapons with lower range would have a higher DPS. Fun > Realism
Mobius Kaethis Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 1467	Posted - 2014.06.08 09:06:00 - [53] - Quote Devs, I've been digging into this a bit deeper and was wondering what range the majority of kills occur at? Fun > Realism
Velociraptor antirrhopus Kang Lo Directorate Gallente Federation 154	Posted - 2014.06.08 09:31:00 - [54] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: How are things different in America? You don't want to know. However from an aesthetic perspective some parts are still untouched by human beings and some cities aren't that bad. Just got back from seeing the worlds biggest and most complete tyrannosaurus rex skeleton in Chicago. Anywho, rifles. I have used the Assault Rifle for my entire 9 month Dust career. Hotfix Alpha's changes have lessened the pain from when 1.8 completely obsoleted it, however... It's not enough to warrant skilling into over the CR. I've already wasted over 2 million SP on it, and if it continues to be unable to compete I will switch to another light weapon. The hotfix has encouraged me to MAYBE raise my sharpshooter from 3 to 4, but I don't think I should if I want to stay a competitive Dust player at the Planetary Conquest level. It's a weapon for Pub matches, and if you don't have anything else it's reliable on a Logi. But it's garbage for everything else still. The numbers in the OP prove that to me. My thoughts on Hotfix Alpha: First I noticed a scout running from my AR. Then a heavy. Then a COMBAT RIFLE USER. CCP +1
Mobius Kaethis Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 1467	Posted - 2014.06.08 16:15:00 - [55] - Quote I've really been thinking about the rifle balance issue and the total lack of diversity it is causing so I've started making a spreadsheet to help visualize the problem and possible solutions. 1.8 hotfix alpha weapons stats link Take a look at the assault rifle proposal tab. I think the top graph pretty clearly shows that there is an issue with the assault type weapons, though it isn't entirely clear why the AR is so underwhelming compared to the other assault type weapons. The lower graph is my attempt at a more reasonable set of stats but I fear that it won't do enough for the AR so suggestions are very much welcome. Once we get some numbers the community is in general consensus about I'll change the OP. Fun > Realism

CCP Logibro C C P C C P Alliance 7997	Posted - 2014.06.08 21:13:00 - [56] - Quote Another thing I want to add that we're considering with the rifles is normalising the range across all the tiers. What this would mean is the standard and advanced versions of each rifle (Scrambler, Assault/Plasma, Combat, Rail) would get the same range as the prototype version. CCP Logibro // Patron Saint of Logistics // Distributor of Nanites (a¦á_a¦á)

Funkmaster Whale Whale Farm 2300	Posted - 2014.06.08 21:14:00 - [57] - Quote CCP Logibro wrote: Another thing I want to add that we're considering with the rifles is normalising the range across all the tiers. What this would mean is the standard and advanced versions of each rifle (Scrambler, Assault/Plasma, Combat, Rail) would get the same range as the prototype version. Yes please. Follow me on Twitch.tv!
Grimmiers 578	Posted - 2014.06.08 21:36:00 - [58] - Quote CCP Logibro wrote: Another thing I want to add that we're considering with the rifles is normalising the range across all the tiers. What this would mean is the standard and advanced versions of each rifle (Scrambler, Assault/Plasma, Combat, Rail) would get the same range as the prototype version. My exile would love that.
Mobius Kaethis Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 1467	Posted - 2014.06.08 21:50:00 - [59] - Quote I assume that your not saying you will normalize all 'assault' type weapons only that all GAR will have the same range as the Duvolle. In that case I am all in favor of the change. No comments on my little graphs? Fun > Realism
Floyd20 Azizora L.O.T.I.S. 48	Posted - 2014.06.08 21:54:00 - [60] - Quote CCP Logibro wrote: Another thing I want to add that we're considering with the rifles is normalising the range across all the tiers. What this would mean is the standard and advanced versions of each rifle (Scrambler, Assault/Plasma, Combat, Rail) would get the same range as the prototype version. that would be fun. also, when is the ar being renamed plasma rifle?

SponkSponkSponk The Southern Legion Final Resolution. 868	Posted - 2014.06.08 22:26:00 - [61] - Quote Floyd20 Azizora wrote: that would be fun. also, when is the ar being renamed plasma rifle? In legion. CCP devs have already stated that they won't be changing the name of the AR in Dust. Dust/Eve transfers

CCP Logibro C C P C C P Alliance 8012	Posted - 2014.06.08 22:44:00 - [62] - Quote Mobius Kaethis wrote: I assume that your not saying you will normalize all 'assault' type weapons only that all GAR will have the same range as the Duvolle. In that case I am all in favor of the change. No comments on my little graphs? Yes, all the Assault/Plasma Rifles will have the same range as the Duvolle and all the Tactical Assault/Plasma Rifles will have the same range as the Duvolle Tactical No comments yet as it's still the weekend. I'll take a look next week when I'm back in the office. SponkSponkSponk wrote: Floyd20 Azizora wrote: that would be fun. also, when is the ar being renamed plasma rifle? In legion. CCP devs have already stated that they won't be changing the name of the AR in Dust. That was the initial plan, but it's not off the table. No guarantees though. CCP Logibro // Patron Saint of Logistics // Distributor of Nanites (a¦á_a¦á)

Aeon Amadi Edimmu Warfighters Gallente Federation 5992	Posted - 2014.06.09 03:16:00 - [63] - Quote CCP Logibro wrote: Mobius Kaethis wrote: I assume that your not saying you will normalize all 'assault' type weapons only that all GAR will have the same range as the Duvolle. In that case I am all in favor of the change. No comments on my little graphs? Yes, all the Assault/Plasma Rifles will have the same range as the Duvolle and all the Tactical Assault/Plasma Rifles will have the same range as the Duvolle Tactical No comments yet as it's still the weekend. I'll take a look next week when I'm back in the office. SponkSponkSponk wrote: Floyd20 Azizora wrote: that would be fun. also, when is the ar being renamed plasma rifle? In legion. CCP devs have already stated that they won't be changing the name of the AR in Dust. That was the initial plan, but it's not off the table. No guarantees though. Is there an effort being made toward slowly implementing tieracide in Dust 514 or is this something that's going to be reserved for Legion? Useful Links Aeon Amadi for CPM1
SponkSponkSponk The Southern Legion Final Resolution. 869	Posted - 2014.06.09 08:41:00 - [64] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: Is there an effort being made toward slowly implementing tieracide in Dust 514 or is this something that's going to be reserved for Legion? The change to locus grenades implies tiericide is not only neglected, but actively rejected. Dust/Eve transfers


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.