DUST Search - [QUESTION] Combat Rifle clip reduction

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

[QUESTION] Combat Rifle clip reduction

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Starlight Burner ROGUE RELICS VP Gaming Alliance 53	Posted - 2014.12.23 06:37:00 - [1] - Quote 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? Thank god for CCP Rattati!! Rogue Relics is my home away from home.
abdullah muzaffar G0DS AM0NG MEN General Tso's Alliance 102	Posted - 2014.12.23 06:42:00 - [2] - Quote Git gud, SCRub
Fizzer XCIV Heaven's Lost Property Negative-Feedback 1498	Posted - 2014.12.23 08:07:00 - [3] - Quote The ScR mag wasn't too big. It was irrelevant. I'm an ScR user, and the mag size reduction might as we'll not have happened, as it had no effect. They could have increased the magazine to 100, and it still wouldn't have meant anything. In fact, I'd have rather had them reduce the ScR mag to 24. That would have made it OP though, so I see why they didn't. Anyway, the amount of bullets in a mag doesn't really mean anything by itself, and it really doesn't mean anything when concerning the ScR. The Damage per Mag is what counts, again excluding the ScR. And the CR has a balanced DpM. It needs no reductions. Someone's gotta tell the stupids that their ideas are bad, and I guess it's my job...
Jadd Hatchen KILL-EM-QUICK 743	Posted - 2014.12.23 15:25:00 - [4] - Quote 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? U R DUM! Have you tried to use a combat rifle? It takes nearly the entire clip to kill someone with a shield tank half the time and even then you have to switch to your flaylock pistol to finish them off! If anything the combat rifle needs MORE ammo per clip not less.
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4087	Posted - 2014.12.23 15:37:00 - [5] - 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
TYCHUS MAXWELL The Fun Police 760	Posted - 2014.12.23 15:48:00 - [6] - Quote 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?
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4087	Posted - 2014.12.23 15:51:00 - [7] - 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
TYCHUS MAXWELL The Fun Police 760	Posted - 2014.12.23 16:04:00 - [8] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: 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. The standard AR went up to 70. It also has 31 damage at standard while the ACR has 19.5 I believe at standard. That's a 58% higher amount of damage for the AR. The AR has 800 rpm over the ACR at 1200 RPM. This means that the AR has 50% slower firing rate with 58% higher damage per shot along with a larger magazine. Don't talk ** if you don't know the values. The TAR went up to 36. i haven't used it but I've been told the dispersion and recoil were lowered which I hope isn't true, that said making its magazines comparative to the ScR was also a mistake. The Burst went up to 1200 rpm -> The same as CR with also rougly 6 more points damage. This one is just a flat out stomp. Breach AR has a higher damage for RPM trade off then any other breach variants. The point I was trying to make is that if we are going to try to buff weapons to perform well against armor... because the old variants of the rifle did great against shield tanks... we might as well remove damage profiles and balance without them.
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4087	Posted - 2014.12.23 16:09:00 - [9] - 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
TYCHUS MAXWELL The Fun Police 761	Posted - 2014.12.23 16:10:00 - [10] - Quote 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... The reason you don't see how is why this game is getting balance ****** again. If the AR performs more effectively then its effectiveness goes up against both. Before the buffs the AR performed great against shield tanks and not so great against armor. Now they perform better against armor and well guess how that works on shield tanks? This is what happens when you datamine and cater to the meta. We have only one true shield tank dropsuit and 2 armor tank dropsuits. Armor profiled weapons should be killing more and shield profiles should be killing less. Why? As I realize you are slow i'll explain, there is potential for twice as many armor tanks to be killed then shield tanks. This is of course ignoring that the meta also favors armor tanking currently over shield tanking.

Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4087	Posted - 2014.12.23 16:12:00 - [11] - 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
Lightning35 Delta514 48TH SPECIAL OPERATIONS FORCE 135	Posted - 2014.12.23 16:15:00 - [12] - Quote Jadd Hatchen 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? U R DUM! Have you tried to use a combat rifle? It takes nearly the entire clip to kill someone with a shield tank half the time and even then you have to switch to your flaylock pistol to finish them off! If anything the combat rifle needs MORE ammo per clip not less. The reason the other rifles got a clip reduction is because they got an INCREASE in damage per round to go with it so the overall damage produced per clip remained the same. You can still kill multiple people with ONE clip of ammo on those other weapons. I'm lucky to kill even ONE person with an ENTIRE clip on the combat rifles. Who the hell designs a weapon that has to use an entire clip to kill one person anyways? As someone who has protoed out EVERY weapon, I disagree with you. I can wreck a team with only a militia cr with no damage mods. I like how it is, but to balance the game, it will need a small clip reduction. ONLY the combat rifle. Leave the assault alone. It's good as it is. 48th Special Operations Force. "As a team or alone, I dominate the battlefield."
TYCHUS MAXWELL The Fun Police 761	Posted - 2014.12.23 16:17:00 - [13] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: 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. I also meant a chart that shows the actual values not a dps comparison. To be honest, I'm not even sure what those range values are supposed to be... in decimeters?
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4087	Posted - 2014.12.23 16:26:00 - [14] - 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
TYCHUS MAXWELL The Fun Police 761	Posted - 2014.12.23 16:30:00 - [15] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: 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 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?
TYCHUS MAXWELL The Fun Police 761	Posted - 2014.12.23 16:35:00 - [16] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: 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. Can you explain your edit? How is the damage application different for the Burst AR than the CR? Define more consistently...
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4087	Posted - 2014.12.23 16:39:00 - [17] - 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
TYCHUS MAXWELL The Fun Police 761	Posted - 2014.12.23 16:46:00 - [18] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: 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. In theory, shield units should be good at long range encounters but there's one thing that makes this not possible. Shield recharge delay. Anytime something hit markers a shield suit, your shield delay resets. The hit can even do 0 damage like the splash on a standard forge gun and it will still reset your shield delay. This makes only cover based encounters practical. However, at long range cover based armor repping is just as effective while armor has the benefit of their lower speed being a non-issue and their higher pools of hp allowing them to stay out in the open for longer. The only way a shield suit can currently gain an edge is in close range cover based fighting where you can duck in and out of cover and quickly close the gap between you and the armor tank to take advantage of your faster regen at the sacrifice of your lower hp. It also again, doesn't help that most armor suits (especially heavies) can have high shield values at base along with also comparatively self sufficient regen. Compare a Caldari assaults natural 1 rep per second to a gallente suits 20 shield regen per second.
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4087	Posted - 2014.12.23 16:55:00 - [19] - 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
TYCHUS MAXWELL The Fun Police 762	Posted - 2014.12.23 17:01:00 - [20] - Quote 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.

Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4092	Posted - 2014.12.23 17:06:00 - [21] - 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
TYCHUS MAXWELL The Fun Police 763	Posted - 2014.12.23 17:10:00 - [22] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: 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. 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. Likewise the lower the RPM the higher the kick and dispersion although not as hampered probably something like half that of the % increase in kick and dispersion as to damage and RPM. IE. AR having 25% more kick and dispersion than the ACR, this will also play right into the Gallente bonus of pretty much negating the difference at level 5 gallente assault.
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4092	Posted - 2014.12.23 17:16:00 - [23] - 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
TYCHUS MAXWELL The Fun Police 763	Posted - 2014.12.23 17:24:00 - [24] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: 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. Yes, I like those concepts very much. A being the breach, B being the assault, C being the burst, and D being the tactical. I'd love to see that next time rifle balance for CCP comes up. Honestly before tweaking any other rifles they need to finish the variance and tweak them. Because as it stands, all the rifles will need a rework anyways to make this work. The rifles really need to be formulaic with their dps. Right now the values are all over the place.
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4093	Posted - 2014.12.23 17:26:00 - [25] - 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


Pages: [1] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last 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.