I'd be up for that if the AR isn't able to shoot more than 20m and kicks wildly when shot for more than 7 rounds in a row and if the combat rifle became uncontrollable after two bursts and the scrambler overheated after three shots.

Maybe then you'll see how ridiculous your notion of 'balance' is.

You're 100% correct that usage =/= OP, and that the fact that people flock to a weapon alone doesn't mean it's OP, but it should certainly raise the eyebrows of the person who's job it is to track such things.

The example you are giving, to me, is actually what Rattati is getting to in point #1: "even though players migrate over to RR, there is no dilution of efficiency as might be expected"

Take the Scrambler. It's not easy to use, but wrecks in the right hands, like Rattati said. It was around far longer than the RR but you never really saw the same migration to it. Because it's not easy to use.... it's very abusable with modded controllers or macros, but otherwise it's mechanics limited it. So, if every blueberry in the world started using it, you'd better believe the K/S would drop.

Didn't happen with the RR. All comers, from all the scrubs who needed the eHP of a sentinel to stay alive to every brainless noob in my local, they all started using it. And still did well.

50% of the people playing this game are not really good, are they? I doubt you'd answer yes to that.

That's the crux of the whole thing. The overall skill level here is not high enough that it makes any sense that if everyone started using a weapon because it killed them all the time, the overall K/S of the weapon wouldn't drop. It would have to strictly based on regression to the mean, if nothing else!

You seem to be mistaken as to what QQ actually is, I actually find it pretty offensive that you would try to diminish what are legitimate complaints and informed opinions by writing them off as "QQ". Leadfoot posted tests he did on hipfire. Combat rifles get 5 pixels of kick, Assault rifles get about 5 degrees, SCR's are much like combat rifles and functionally don't kick. Assault rails get 60 degrees of kick + left to right. Rails get 120 degrees of kick. That is not balance Fox, and you're an idiot if you claim that it is.

I've asked multiple times for what I think the relevant metric on the rail rifle is - What range are kills happening at, because it is a known fact that the rail rifle drastically outranges a lot of other guns and many people would happily sacrifice the 20-25% more dps they'd get from an AR to get 40m more range on a rail.

As I've said, nerfing the close quarters isn't the right thing to do, the rail needs a range nerf.

I think that many just want the RR to become a niche weapon due to it being overpopular rather than truly overpowered.

Either that, or they are judging things having never used the weapon for any significant amount of time, nor evaluated where the kills and deaths of this weapon are really occurring, and certainly not from experience in PCs -- where that weapon was been relegated to niche long ago...because it was already relatively ineffective when compared to every other rifle in CQC.

But it has been so popular for so long, and people don't like dying, so the reaction is to nerf the overpopular nature by making become less OP...when it was not OP in the first place (as evidenced by the K/S numbers which show it as in line with other rifles even before this nerf).

Overpopular in pubs != Overpowered

Listen, if the RR were as OP as some would have us believe, it would be used by the best players in the game in the most competitive field, PC. However, the anti-infantry weapons used in PC is full of HMGs and SG scouts, with the occasional CR. The RR is really only used in very specific situations (camping the supply depot bridge in the rings map, or the mushroom in the two towers maps, or guarding the approach to one of the outside points in the bridge map from the top of a building). Why? Because the best players in this game (not me!) figured out long ago that the RR sucked in comparison and other weapons simply were more powerful.

Why the rest of the players haven't figured it out is beyond me, but it is crystal clear when you watch any PC killfeed what's being used, and if you bring a RR into any spot accessible to a scout or a heavy you'll learn real quick how ill-equpped the RR and ARR are in comparison.

Now, I'm not saying we should balance PC matches at the expense of pubs, but I am suggesting there are lessons to be learned there that apply to general gameplay and how to nerf said weapon if it is overused. And none of those lessons point at reducing the CQC effectivness of the already-weakest CQC gun, the RR/ARR.

Now, if our intent is to make the weapon into a niche weapon and drive down usage, I'd say this nerf will likely attain that goal, but not without a significant drop in terms of effectiveness (and perhaps a balancing hotfix to correct this over-correction).

Regardless, and even if I feel that he missed the mark with this latest nerf, I'm confident that Ratatti will get this right over time, so perhaps I should just shut up and let him figure it out through iterative balancing adjustments.

Have fun guys...Leadfoot

Again, simply wrong. It was the most popular weapon, not the best. If it was the best, it would have had a clear K/S advantage. The data shows it does not...despite having a range advantage that would lead towards higher K/S situation -- killing at range.

Are you judging the RR by Saxon's videos killing noobs on USA servers from his home in Europe in the morning USA time? Taking nothing away from Saxon, who's one of the most experienced and highly skilled players in this game, but lolz.

And the most telling question of all: If the RR was so superior, why was it only on one of your fits? I'll wait for your answer to that one.

Rattati, let say, that we had an empty map with flat terrain (no cover at all). both teams spawn 400m from each other. one team is using assault rifles, and combat rifles. the other team is using rail rifles, and scrambler rifles.

which team do you think would win an ambush?

after the match ends, the teams are allowed to select new weapons. which weapon do you think will be selected after the first battle?

at this point you should be considering poor map design as the problem for RR popularity. More cover, increased broken lines of sight, and you make long range weapon ineffective, and close range weapons more preferred. There is a reason why the RR is popular and its not because its great at CQC.

2. Automatic weapons will always be good in CQC barring some insane measures to counter this, such as the ridiculous kick on the RR currently. What we need to do is reduce its rate of fire while upping its per-hit damage to keep it at its current DPS. I can run numbers and make a spreadsheet if you're interested (especially now that I know how to share them, thanks for showing me that! )

You just sold me on the ARR right there. I HATE the scopes in DUST