|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Not Jason Pearson
5
   |
Posted - 2014.07.16 18:33:00 -
[1] - Quote
Actually made an alt to post my ideas again, as I'm sure the majority of you remember it's what I do (As in, I make bad ideas everyone facepalms at <3). As always, I know where the Feedback thread is CCP, this is a discussion.
I want to discuss changing weapon optimals to affect both long and close ranges, to make sure everybody knows what I mean, you have an optimal and an effective range, your effective range is where your weapon will stop firing past, if you have a weapon with 100m effective, a bullet won't travel past 100m. Your optimal is a range within that where you will do 100% damage, so for example, if you're running a weapon with an 80m optimal and 100m effective, you will do 100% damage all the way to 80m, but it will drop off significantly past that.
What I would like to see, is most weapons being treated like a Laser Rifle. For example, a Rail Rifle is an effective long range weapon, it has a high effective range and it's optimal is from 0. A laser rifle however loses efficiency the closer you are if you're outside the optimal.
Surprisingly I hear players state that the Rail Rifle is infact, OP, now while it may or may not be OP, the reason people feel that it is, is because it can be very effective up close, and with such a large damage output you can see why people feel that way. So why not, instead of weapons optimal start from say 0m-80m with an effective range of 100m, why not make it 40m-80m with an effective range of 0m-100m.
Thanks for reading.
Not King of the Forums
|
Not Jason Pearson
6
|
Posted - 2014.07.16 19:27:00 -
[2] - Quote
halloooo?
Not King of the Forums
|
Not Jason Pearson
10
|
Posted - 2014.07.16 20:47:00 -
[3] - Quote
Thumb Green wrote:
Actually, since 1.2 there is optimal, effective, and absolute range. But even then the bullet does not stop at the absolute range; it just doesn't really do any damage.
Chunky Munkey wrote:You made an alt?
So what's your main??????
I hate you Q_Q
Thumb Green wrote:
Actually, since 1.2 there is optimal, effective, and absolute range. But even then the bullet does not stop at the absolute range; it just doesn't really do any damage.
My mistake, cheers man ^_^
MINA Longstrike wrote:
Turning the rail rifle into the caldari laser doesn't fix it. It is the only main-line caldari weapon and it should keep its effectiveness throughout its range. What it shouldn't keep is the ranges that are so extreme that no other rifle can compete with it unless they're put on a scout, or the dps that allows it to perform comparably to other weapons in the same category throughout its whole range.
The. Rail Rifle. Needs. A. Range. Reduction.
Apologies, I wasn't aiming for just the Rail Rifle, but all weapons. The ranges for the weapons are key to diversity imo, but the way it is implemented means that longer range weapons (I believe the Scrambler would also be part of this, no?) can be very effective up close. I say that as someone who loves RRs and as someone who watches people like Lorhak (Literally only person who comes to mind because I rarely play without him) wreck with scrambler rifles up close and afar. By keeping it's long range but losing effectiveness at a closer range, I mean I'm talking like 30% max at 0m, players wouldn't want to be in that situation.
Something I mainly had in mind was if the sidearms were the only one that had an effective range from 0m, while other weapons started from like a minimum of 10m
Gavr1lo Pr1nc1p wrote:The only ppl complaining about the RR are heavies who complain about every counter to them, despite none of them being hard counters or even feasible
To be fair, I'm a massive Caldari enthusiast, I run most suits with a RR minus my Cal Sent with a HMG/Forge, and even when I'm not fighting heavies I can see why people dislike it, not that it's OP or broken, I don't believe it is, I was merely using it as an example, but I'd like to see it for all types of weapons, putting more weapons in a niche (I think that's the term I'm looking for..) and making you think a bit more about your choices.
Right now I can look at my RR Assault and go "Doesn't matter where I go, I'll be fine", but I'd like to be more concerned about my weapon choice if I know I'm going to be in CQC, I'd also like to be forced to rely on my sidearm a little more.
Not King of the Forums
|
Not Jason Pearson
27
|
Posted - 2014.07.16 23:38:00 -
[4] - Quote
Leeroy Gannarsein wrote:NO YOU ***** DON'T TOUCH MY ScR IT'S BALANCED
LISTEN YOU, IF WE DON'T GET YOU NERFED, YOU'LL HAVE A BETTER KDR THAN ME
That is unacceptable.
Not King of the Forums
|
Not Jason Pearson
33
|
Posted - 2014.07.17 12:35:00 -
[5] - Quote
Dauth Jenkins wrote:The problem with those is that caldari and amarr dont have the best sidearms. The amarr has only a pistol, which is a mid range sidearm, not good up close (in the hands of most people), and the caldari have 2 long ranged sidearm (even the magsec isn't the best at CQC. If they were to get better CQC sidearms, maybe then I'd be fine with only doing 30 % damage with a scrambler rifle at point blank.
It'd be more like 70-80%, it wouldn't be such a big hit, but enough to make you consider using other weapons depending on where you're at.
Not King of the Forums
|
|
|
| |
|