DUST Search - [QUESTION] Combat Rifle clip reduction

TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote:

Pokey Dravon wrote:

I think a minimum threshold of damage should be required to stop the recharge. I still think you should lose the HP, but require a minimum amount of damage to actually stop the recharge. Shield vehicles work in this way.

Also armor units have waaay too good of a shield recharge rate. I'd rather see them have a shorter delay with a slower recharge, rather than the moderate recharge with long delay.

I agree, those have been my suggestions to rebalancing shield and armor tanking. That said, I still believe the CR and AR should perform equally with different damage profiles as their major differences. IE the AR should have 50% more damage for 50% less RPM than the ACR and the Burst AR should have the same damage if its going to have the same RPM as the CR. If this means lower the CR and ACR to the same effective ranges as the AR and Burst AR then I say by all means it should be done. Minmitar are not long range suits, it's a terrible rifle currently for them considering the CR is supposed to be their rifle. They need a rifle that is comparative in CQC to other CQC rifles, not slightly weaker with slightly higher range.


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4087	Posted - 2014.12.23 15:37:00 - [1] - Quote Combat Rifle 29.7 Dmg (34.155 Prof 5) 54 Bullets 1603.8 Dmg/Mag (1844.37 Prof 5) Assault Combat Rifle 21.83 Dmg (25.1045 Prof 5) 68 Bullets 1484.4 Dmg/Mag (1707.1 Prof 5) Scrambler Rifle 71.5 Dmg (82.225 Prof 5) 30 Charges 2145 Dmg/Mag (2466.7 Prof 5) Assault Scramble Rifle 35.75 Dmg (41.1125 Prof 5) 72 Charges 2574 Dmg/Mag (2960.1 Prof 5) "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4087	Posted - 2014.12.23 15:51:00 - [2] - Quote TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote: Starlight Burner wrote: CCP Rattati, I now ask you to do the same adjustments that you've done with the Scrambler Rifle to the Combat Rifle. I agree that the clip size in the Scrambler Rifle with it's amount of damage it does is too high. Now You should look at the Combat Rifle. The clip size with the Assault Combat rifle is 68. The clip size with the Combat rifle is 56. Would you please look at the amount of damage the Combat Rifle can do to Armor with it's current effciency range and clip size? If you're not planning on looking at it may I know why please? Is this why the AR got buffed to be good against armor? I hadn't looked at features and suggestions in a while but now it makes sense that Rattatai has been going full **** on weapon balance lately. If we are going to assume that all weapons should perform well against armor and ignore their shield profile, how about we just remove damage profiles? This 's getting ****, the AR and Burst AR now have larger magazines and higher damage output then the CR and ACR what the hell do you people want? No weapon but the AR to be viable? The heck are you talking about? Assault Rifle is still +10% to shield and -10% to armor. Only change it got was a larger magazine which doesn't affect profile at all. And yes ARs have the highest DPS, this is based off of a linear progression of range to DPS. That is to say as range increases, DPS decreases. "That little st Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4087	Posted - 2014.12.23 16:09:00 - [3] - Quote Well again, Combat Rifle has more range than the AR, so yes, it will have less DPS. Thank you for providing the values to confirm my statement. As for Burst, again, less range, more damage for the AR. Working as intended. Have not tried the Tac yet so I can't comment on that. Also....again, I don't see how these changes were supposed to be a buff to the AR against armor? Any change in DPS would affect both armor and shields, nor was anyone calling for, nor was the intention to buff the AR against armor. I really have no idea where you got that impression. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4087	Posted - 2014.12.23 16:12:00 - [4] - Quote TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: Well again, Combat Rifle has more range than the AR, so yes, it will have less DPS. Thank you for providing the values to confirm my statement. As for Burst, again, less range, more damage for the AR. Working as intended. Have not tried the Tac yet so I can't comment on that. Also....again, I don't see how these changes were supposed to be a buff to the AR against armor? Any change in DPS would affect both armor and shields, nor was anyone calling for, nor was the intention to buff the AR against armor. I really have no idea where you got that impression. Can you list the optimal and effective range for both? I don't know where the link is. Last I checked it was maybe a 10 meter difference in effective... https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174569&find=unread EDIT: Note that range values along the bottom are in cm for some reason... I guess its a UE3 thing? Just divide by 100 for meters. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4087	Posted - 2014.12.23 16:26:00 - [5] - Quote Well, I don't have that table on hand but I can read the graph. Assault Rifle & Breach Assault Rifle 69m Effective Range Burst Assault Rifle 78m Effective Range Combat Rifle 84m Effective Range Assault Combat Rifle 79m Effective Range Assault Scrambler Rifle 88m Effective Range Tactical Assault Rifle 90m Effective Range Scrambler Rifle 96m Effective Range Assault Rail Rifle 97m Effective Range Rail Rifle 100m Effective Range EDIT Keep in mind that at 78m, the damage application of the AR is very inconsistent whereas the Combat Rifle will tend to apply its DPS a bit more consistently. To only look at range and DPS as factors in choosing a weapon is rather short sighted. I mean if you look at the effective range of a shotgun, you'll better understand the principle. Just because the range is listed as a certain value does not mean it's actually going to perform at that range. But you seem rather decided in your convictions so I suppose my words are wasted. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4087	Posted - 2014.12.23 16:39:00 - [6] - Quote TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote: Like I said, it's just not a practical weapon for the minmitar since the AR buffs, although I do see it still being useful on brick tank amarrs but what else is new? The armor tanks were better with RR and now CR anyways. Games all kinds of **** up because of the shield regen vs. armor rep issues. Caldari and Minmitar suits sort of favor short ranges where they can keep to cover and minmize shield delay resets while armor tanks favor dragging out damage to effective ranges where their constant rep can mitigate the numbers. At least the Caldari still have the ARR, but I can't see any point to the ACR if it isn't as easy to control as the AR and the burst AR is now just better flat out. In all seriousness though, you can't tell me you think a 6 meter difference is a fair trade off for the Burst AR having 6 more damage than the CR with the same RPM and a larger magazine? Its interesting that you feel the Shield units should be close range, I would state the exact opposite. At range the shield user can find cover without the risk of the enemy charging them, allowing them the time to quickly regenerate their HP. Armor on the other hand regenerates slower but more reliably, thus allowing it to to perform decently even if its expecting to take minor damage at close range because taking a couple shots wont reset their regen. This is largely why Armor is favored because fights for objectives are almost always close range encounters. I would argue however that we absolutely should have a Shield Transporter Tool as well as the Armor Repair Tool. Also, I think the burst AR in general needs some serious rework to make it feel more unique rather than just a higher DPS lower range version of the Combat Rifle. "That little st Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4087	Posted - 2014.12.23 16:55:00 - [7] - Quote I think a minimum threshold of damage should be required to stop the recharge. I still think you should lose the HP, but require a minimum amount of damage to actually stop the recharge. Shield vehicles work in this way. Also armor units have waaay too good of a shield recharge rate. I'd rather see them have a shorter delay with a slower recharge, rather than the moderate recharge with long delay. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4092	Posted - 2014.12.23 17:06:00 - [8] - Quote TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: I think a minimum threshold of damage should be required to stop the recharge. I still think you should lose the HP, but require a minimum amount of damage to actually stop the recharge. Shield vehicles work in this way. Also armor units have waaay too good of a shield recharge rate. I'd rather see them have a shorter delay with a slower recharge, rather than the moderate recharge with long delay. I agree, those have been my suggestions to rebalancing shield and armor tanking. That said, I still believe the CR and AR should perform equally with different damage profiles as their major differences. IE the AR should have 50% more damage for 50% less RPM than the ACR and the Burst AR should have the same damage if its going to have the same RPM as the CR. If this means lower the CR and ACR to the same effective ranges as the AR and Burst AR then I say by all means it should be done. Minmitar are not long range suits, it's a terrible rifle currently for them considering the CR is supposed to be their rifle. They need a rifle that is comparative in CQC to other CQC rifles, not slightly weaker with slightly higher range. I have heard people talking about the idea of flatlining the rifles within the variants to make them perform equally well with DPS and whatnot. It's an interesting proposal though I dont' think I can get behind it entirely until we have proper variants for all 4 weapons, and then balance the variants around range and DPS, but keep the races equal within the variant. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4092	Posted - 2014.12.23 17:16:00 - [9] - Quote TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote: Yes that, so much that. We need all the variants to be released and balance dps and range through variance and not weapon type. The weapon types should vary the damage profile with equal differences for dps purposes. Like the AR having 50% more damage with 50% less RPM than the ACR and likewise the ARR having like 75% more damage with 75% less RPM than the ACR. Likewise have the AScR have 50% less RPM and 50% more damage like the AR however give it 1.5 times the magazine size of the AR to counter balance its heat build up. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1bYsFvH2WESWLPp_IyFr1GWMUYD3jZfiMgQQxofUAN6o/edit?usp=sharing Have you ever seen that doc floating around? Its a little old now but it contains some of my scribbles on rifle rework. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4093	Posted - 2014.12.23 17:26:00 - [10] - Quote Well I think the linear relationship between range and DPS isn't a bad idea. Its more a matter of what the slope of that line should be, assuming they keep with the DPS/Range differential. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net