|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
LUGMOS
Corrosive Synergy
1900
|
Posted - 2015.02.06 00:55:00 -
[1] - Quote
OK. So now I have to put it out there. Sorry Amarr bros.
When the rail rifle had epic range while still being good up close, it was deemed OP and damage application up close was nerfed.
Right now, with the regular Scrambler rifle you have the same deal. It is literally a long range rifle with a shotgun attachment that can be used by holding R1. It is way too versatile for a weapon that can shoot that far and do that much damage with that high of a RoF.
Now, the Laser Rifle is pretty balanced because of one mechanic that makes it unusable up close: a damage penalty up close.
Why doesn't the normal Scrambler variant have this? I mean, its not like there isn't an Assault variant that is supposed to fill its CQC role. So why not introduce a damage scalar?
TL;DR: introduce damage penalty up close for ScR
Official QuafeGäó Advocate
Anti-FoTM Prof. V
Forum Scavenger Prof. V
|
LUGMOS
Corrosive Synergy
1900
|
Posted - 2015.02.06 01:00:00 -
[2] - Quote
Mortishai Belmont wrote:Everything kills everything in 5 seconds or less if your aim is good. Yeah, but that's not the point.
The point is range effectivity, it is good nearly anywhere, even up close.
Official QuafeGäó Advocate
Anti-FoTM Prof. V
Forum Scavenger Prof. V
|
LUGMOS
Corrosive Synergy
1900
|
Posted - 2015.02.06 01:04:00 -
[3] - Quote
Protocake JR wrote:Oh wow, this thread again. Lol, cept this time it has actual rational.
Official QuafeGäó Advocate
Anti-FoTM Prof. V
Forum Scavenger Prof. V
|
LUGMOS
Corrosive Synergy
1900
|
Posted - 2015.02.06 01:20:00 -
[4] - Quote
Vitharr Foebane wrote:1. RR doesn't explode in your face 2. AScR is one of if not the worst gun in the game 3. charge shot does less then half the damage of a SG while costing over 2/3 of over heat gauge 4. while ScR is one the best 1v1 guns in the game over heat limits it's group fighting capabilities Hmmm... Interesting points, albeight a bit off.
Charge doesn't cost over 2/3, but I'll take it that it does cost quite a bit. AScR actually is not that bad anymore, but it is missing something. Once it is buffed a bit, maybe this proposal will be more acceptable. While the charge is less than a shotgun blast, what about the follow up shots? Yes, the RR doesn't blow up in your face, but the damage application is very unreliable for the range it is supposed to exceed in. Unrelated points? Maybe. But it is all about balance. The RR can't really fight off groups either, it's like an SR, it is only annoying and good for pinging those out in the open. (All points assuming normal variant)
All in all, I don't want an all out Nerf on the ScR, just want it (normal variant) to be more restricted on where it is supposed to be best at.
Official QuafeGäó Advocate
Anti-FoTM Prof. V
Forum Scavenger Prof. V
|
LUGMOS
Corrosive Synergy
1900
|
Posted - 2015.02.06 01:38:00 -
[5] - Quote
Dengru wrote:You can't balance weapons by arbitrary damage drop-offs when maps force you into close to medium range engagements So then get rid of the Laser Rifle's.
It is practically useless because of it's falloff in close range maps. And it's arbitrary.
LogicGäó
Not only that, you missed my point. The reason nobody uses the AScR is not because it is terrible, it is just because the regular ScR is just better, so there is no point. That, and it costs more.
Official QuafeGäó Advocate
Anti-FoTM Prof. V
Forum Scavenger Prof. V
|
LUGMOS
Corrosive Synergy
1901
|
Posted - 2015.02.06 01:41:00 -
[6] - Quote
SgtMajSquish MLBJ wrote:SCR penalty is -80% damage to armor making it rather difficult to finish off armor tanked enemies before it overheats Yes, and is that not how it should be? If the ScR was forced to actually play smart, you wouldn't have to worry about overheating. Overheating is only a problem when you can be killed by the armor tanker, which means you have to be up close, in which case you shouldn't win with the regular ScR, because the AR should beat you there.
I don't get why people want the ScR to finish everything in one OH...
Official QuafeGäó Advocate
Anti-FoTM Prof. V
Forum Scavenger Prof. V
|
LUGMOS
Corrosive Synergy
1901
|
Posted - 2015.02.06 01:43:00 -
[7] - Quote
SgtMajSquish MLBJ wrote: Dont they have a standard AScR that costs the same as the ScR now?
That's not the important point, but whatever. No I don't think so.
Official QuafeGäó Advocate
Anti-FoTM Prof. V
Forum Scavenger Prof. V
|
LUGMOS
Corrosive Synergy
1903
|
Posted - 2015.02.06 01:57:00 -
[8] - Quote
Zindorak wrote:RR maybe nerfed now but ARR is still a monster and better than ScR. Why do you think most gk.0's,ak.0's and even some mk.0 assaults use it. Dunno.
Maybe the same reason I see a lot of gk.0's, mk.0's, and ck.0's using g the ScR.
Here's to anecdotal evidence, no?
Official QuafeGäó Advocate
Anti-FoTM Prof. V
Forum Scavenger Prof. V
|
LUGMOS
Corrosive Synergy
1904
|
Posted - 2015.02.06 02:03:00 -
[9] - Quote
Gosh darnit you Amarr scrubs...
What I propose is not a direct nerf... If you're using it at it's intended range.
To go along with this change, the AScR should be buffed to make up for the normal variant's newly imposed shortcoming. That is the point of variants, no?
Official QuafeGäó Advocate
Anti-FoTM Prof. V
Forum Scavenger Prof. V
|
LUGMOS
Corrosive Synergy
1904
|
Posted - 2015.02.06 02:12:00 -
[10] - Quote
Vitharr Foebane wrote:LUGMOS wrote:SgtMajSquish MLBJ wrote:SCR penalty is -80% damage to armor making it rather difficult to finish off armor tanked enemies before it overheats Yes, and is that not how it should be? If the ScR was forced to actually play smart, you wouldn't have to worry about overheating. Overheating is only a problem when you can be killed by the armor tanker, which means you have to be up close, in which case you shouldn't win with the regular ScR, because the AR should beat you there. I don't get why people want the ScR to finish everything in one OH... we don't we do want our MAIN FRONTLINE rifle to work. unlike you other races we don't have weapon diversity and what little we do have d*mn well better be functional No diversity in primary weapons?
Lol, you're kidding right?
Amarr: 1. Scrambler -Regular -Assault 2. Laser Rifle
Caldari: 1. Rail Rifle: -Regular -Assault 2. Sniper Rifle
Main battle rifle: which is better? Regular Rail Rifle or regular Scrambler Rifle? And I mean for general use. I won't mention the AR, because, well you know why. Combat Rifle is the only regular variant that is comparably as effective for general use.
Yeah, I think your main battle rifle is quite fine compared to other races.
Official QuafeGäó Advocate
Anti-FoTM Prof. V
Forum Scavenger Prof. V
|
|
LUGMOS
Corrosive Synergy
1904
|
Posted - 2015.02.06 02:33:00 -
[11] - Quote
WeapondigitX V7 wrote:The scrambler has much less optimal and effective range than the rail rifle thus it needs to have much better ability up close.
Its higher fitting cost and lower damage per overheat compared to the assault rifle also creates the need for the scrambler to be kind of good at 25m to 60m engagements.
At engagements of 15m to 25m the scrambler still needs to aim down sights and move much slower to attempt to hit targets most of the time. Other guns like the breach assault rifle and combat rifle can hipfire instead with very good accuracy at 15 to 25m engagements while moving much faster allowing them to comtrol range and dodge a few bullets.
The charge shot of the scrambler (when it is used) reduces the overall damage per overheat compared to firing 22 shots with an amarr assault. The charge shot does roughly 200 damage unmodified by damage profile. The std shotgun does roughly 480 damage unmodified by its damage profile.
The Aim Down Sights recoil of the scrambler rifle prevents it from quickly firing many bullets accurately against enemies that are slightly peeking out of cover and firing at you (at 40m to 70m engagements). This lowers the damage per overheat and dps of the scrambler rifle a lot. I am referring to cover that hides the lower halve of the enemy and may also only expose only one shoulder of the enemy if the cover is shaped like a triangle of boxes.
The breach assault rifle, the burst assault rifle and regular assault rifle does not have large recoil problems.
The cool down time of the scrambler rifle acts like a reload. But it takes 6 seconds to cool down, instead of 3 seconds of reloading like the assault rifles and combat rifles.
Firing at 1 brick tanked enemy like a std amarr assault or gallente assault leaves you very vulnerable with a scrambler rifle. Because it takes 6 seconds to cooldown, an observing enemy might ambush you while you are vulnerable, forcing you to switch to a sidearm for 3 seconds at minimum. That is plenty of time for a skilled person to kill an amarr assault suit with a HMG or ACR etc.
Additionally the higher fitting costs of the scrambler rifle hinders a suits ability to fit good sidearms on top of good modules.
This makes me very confident against scrambler rifle users when I ambush them with a assault suit while using 1 proto profile dampener. (they would need 2 proto precision enhancers to see me coming, which would severely hurt there dps and damage per overheat.)
Good points, now my turn to rebute.
Having less long range ability than the Rail Rifle does not make it entitled to better CQC abilities. I'll just ignore this point for the most part since there is not much backing it.
Also, you say that it needs to be good from 25m-60m. That's fine, except as of now, it is stepping on the AR's shoes in the AR's own range, as it is arguably more effective than the AR due to more reliable damage application, even at hipfire. The AR needs to ADS from 20m out, whereas the ScR's tight hipfire allows it to shoot farther without having to ADS. I don't know what you are talking about with the 15-25 the ScR has to hipfire, and that the AR is at a disadvantage. This is bad, because the ScR should be at a clear disadvantage at that range.
OK, the point with the under barrel shotgun was a hyperbole, so take it with a grain of salt.
Also, with the unreliable damage application after some shots, it won't matter if you're using it in that range. The RR is sooo much worse at that range because of it's ridiculous sight that shakes uncontrollably while firing. The ScRis much better at that range than the RR, granted it is within 70 meters.
Anything else at that range just doesn't compete, including the breach AR, burst AR and TAC AR.
Also, it does not take 6 seconds for the ScR's seizure to end. It is 1 second longer than a reload at most. Also, you shouldnt have to be taking on multiple enemies in one OH. You are asking to die and should. Also, the overheat can be managed by just switching to a sidearm. So there's that.
And the higher fitting costs is not that bad, granted I am using an Amarr Assault, but I can still fit Pro mods and weapons. Also, even if the sidearm is not PRO, is it really that much of a hindrance?
And for the last bit, good for you. If you ambushed them, they should die, regardless of what weapon you are using.
Official QuafeGäó Advocate
Anti-FoTM Prof. V
Forum Scavenger Prof. V
|
LUGMOS
Corrosive Synergy
1904
|
Posted - 2015.02.06 02:35:00 -
[12] - Quote
Shamarskii Simon wrote:What i think LUGMOS is saying is "you fire straight to OH, no temperature control but expect to be able to kill just like that."
Now, linking to RR kick = ScR O.H, the RR cannot kill "easily" by the mule kick around 10-15 rounds. Link that to the ScR. The ScR doesnt have the "mule" as early as the RR, which people said "no RR here" and the penalty was aquired
Hopefully i understood right. Right on the nose.
And @ Weapondigit, who the heck would use dampeners on a heavy frame? For legitimate use too...
Official QuafeGäó Advocate
Anti-FoTM Prof. V
Forum Scavenger Prof. V
|
LUGMOS
Corrosive Synergy
1904
|
Posted - 2015.02.06 02:36:00 -
[13] - Quote
Imp Smash wrote:LUGMOS wrote:Protocake JR wrote:Oh wow, this thread again. Lol, cept this time it has actual rational. *OP posts about rational* *OP neglects to include all facts about SCR in his rational* *context lost* Do you think rifles should be more or less confined to certain ranges?
Official QuafeGäó Advocate
Anti-FoTM Prof. V
Forum Scavenger Prof. V
|
LUGMOS
Corrosive Synergy
1906
|
Posted - 2015.02.06 02:57:00 -
[14] - Quote
All Gucci wrote:LUGMOS wrote:Protocake JR wrote:Oh wow, this thread again. Lol, cept this time it has actual rational. why is it rational? what makes you so special that your opinion is considered a fact? It's not opinion...
There is no range weakness for the Scrambler Rifle. It is good up close, mid range, and long range, and equally so.
Damage application is reliable throughout, and not as difficult as say the Rail Rifle, where the dispersion and kick impair its long range ability. The ScR has very little kick and no dispersion. These are facts, and they were stated.
The change I suggest isn't even a hard Nerf to it's intended use in it's intended range, it was never meant to compete up close with ARs or assault variants.
That being said, I even called for a buff for the Assault ScR to make up for the normal ScR's range weakness... I don't understand your state of mind.
Official QuafeGäó Advocate
Anti-FoTM Prof. V
Forum Scavenger Prof. V
|
LUGMOS
Corrosive Synergy
1907
|
Posted - 2015.02.06 03:06:00 -
[15] - Quote
Imp Smash wrote:Compare the current long range abilities of the RR to the SCR (since these are the two weapons you are comparing), the mid range, short range, and CQC abilities. Then you may go from (Waaaaahhhh!) to (insert excellent point followed by consensus and meaningful change here) Are you ******* kidding me? Can you not read?
It may not be in the OP, but I explain it farther in the thread, if you so care about balance, then you should go ahead and read the entirety of the thread.
But just for you, here I go:
Rail Rifle vs ScR: Assuming Normal Variant
The ScR has a tighter field of dispersion than the Scrambler Rifle. This already means more accuracy. On top of that, the ScR has relatively little to no kick, so the reticle remains constant, even in hipfire. The Rail Rifle, on the other hand, has much kick and recoil, more so than the ScR, even in ADS.
That is all you get in this post, but even just with this, a reduction to CQC effectivity is just, be it more dispersion, or more hipfire kick, or as suggested, a mere efficiency penalty up close.
Official QuafeGäó Advocate
Anti-FoTM Prof. V
Forum Scavenger Prof. V
|
LUGMOS
Corrosive Synergy
1909
|
Posted - 2015.02.06 03:21:00 -
[16] - Quote
All Gucci wrote:LUGMOS wrote:SgtMajSquish MLBJ wrote:SCR penalty is -80% damage to armor making it rather difficult to finish off armor tanked enemies before it overheats Yes, and is that not how it should be? If the ScR was forced to actually play smart, you wouldn't have to worry about overheating. Overheating is only a problem when you can be killed by the armor tanker, which means you have to be up close, in which case you shouldn't win with the regular ScR, because the AR should beat you there. I don't get why people want the ScR to finish everything in one OH... that's where you have things mess up lmao you assume it should go down like rock paper scissors but its a fps so no..... K then.
Go play CoD, where weapon choice doesn't matter as everything kills everything NP...
It should go down rock paper scissors style. Granted, it won't always, but the counter to a long range weapon should be taking it in CQC with a CQC weapon. What? You think shotguns are scrubby? Dang, guess I'll have to use something that isn't CQC. Oh yeah the AR. What? I can't use that either? Because it shouldn't be rock paper scissors? Well what do I use? HMG??? Even scrubbier?
Dang. Guess the only (acceptable) counter is using a ScR and outgunning you. Seems legit.
Official QuafeGäó Advocate
Anti-FoTM Prof. V
Forum Scavenger Prof. V
|
LUGMOS
Corrosive Synergy
1910
|
Posted - 2015.02.06 03:46:00 -
[17] - Quote
Alright, you got me.
I do not have 100% verifiable proof as of now, and won't until this weekend. Then we can have a discussion.
However, this has little to do with my original assertion that the ScR is too good up close, damage wise. It still needs a bit of a tone down.
Official QuafeGäó Advocate
Anti-FoTM Prof. V
Forum Scavenger Prof. V
|
LUGMOS
Corrosive Synergy
1911
|
Posted - 2015.02.06 04:04:00 -
[18] - Quote
OK. At this point, I just want the AScR to be buffed to compete with the BK, ARR, and AR.
Also, I guess what makes the CR and ScR better than the AR and the RR is that they are generalist rifles, as in they cover a very nice swath of range, whereas the AR and RR are confined to their own area.
So I'll pose this question: If the CR and ScR are generalist rifles, and good in a large area, should the more confined rifles be indisputably better than the generalist rifles in their respective ranges? For example, should the AR be the undisputable CQC king, along with the BK, HMG, and ARR?
Official QuafeGäó Advocate
Anti-FoTM Prof. V
Forum Scavenger Prof. V
|
LUGMOS
Corrosive Synergy
1911
|
Posted - 2015.02.06 04:31:00 -
[19] - Quote
xavier zor wrote:The scrambler rifle is in a great place now. It melt's shield-tanking suits just like the CR melt' armor-tanking suits. The CR is the king of CQC in armor-profile weapons and the laser-rifle is king of CQC in shield-profile weapons, SR comes a close 2nd. The CR does over 111 damage/burst to armor, and doesn't do to bat against shield suits using 2 damage mods, prof. 5 The SR does 108/shot to shields, and does just over 66 damage/shot to armor using 2 damage mods. What makes the SR balanced is the heat mechanic, and sieze duration that the CR does not have. A gallente assault with a CR counter's an amarr assault with a SR Atiim wrote:CCP Rattati says that its imbalanced but won't make changes until more players use it. He does not say this He says that if it players start to use this more, and more kills are registered with it then it will get looked at. I'll assume you mean Scrambler Rifle.
In that case, is it ok for the tactical (ie. regular) to be better at CQC than the AScR?
Buff the Assault Scrambler rifle to be comparable to the AR.
Official QuafeGäó Advocate
Anti-FoTM Prof. V
Forum Scavenger Prof. V
|
LUGMOS
Corrosive Synergy
1918
|
Posted - 2015.02.06 16:55:00 -
[20] - Quote
Cassa-Nova wrote:I laugh everytime the +20% is mention while completely ignoring the-20% during the current armour meta. Did I mention it? Sorry hadn't realized I had ghosts...
Official QuafeGäó Advocate
Anti-FoTM Prof. V
Forum Scavenger Prof. V
|
|
LUGMOS
Corrosive Synergy
1923
|
Posted - 2015.02.06 21:20:00 -
[21] - Quote
Thank you Shamarskii.
Hit my point on the nose again. You always had it right.
Official QuafeGäó Advocate
Anti-FoTM Prof. V
Forum Scavenger Prof. V
|
LUGMOS
Corrosive Synergy
1925
|
Posted - 2015.02.06 23:21:00 -
[22] - Quote
Dengru wrote:Do you see the flaw in reasoning in using the sniper and laser as examples when those frequently receive complaints of over-specified range/effectiveness drop offs? Nope.
I don't see the Sniper Rifle or Laser Rifle having a close ranged alternative.
The Scrambler Rifle on the other hand... The close ranged alternative should be used in close ranged engagements instead of the normal variant.
Official QuafeGäó Advocate
Anti-FoTM Prof. V
Forum Scavenger Prof. V
|
LUGMOS
Corrosive Synergy
1926
|
Posted - 2015.02.07 01:24:00 -
[23] - Quote
Imp Smash wrote: Good points and whatnot Alright, I think you have me beat. I still won't agree with the ScR being as good as it is in CQC though, but I can see the slippery slope that could happen.
One thing is for sure, the (regular) RR is much worse than the ScR in close range, but I guess that's fine because of the heat mechanic, if that makes sense.
Official QuafeGäó Advocate
Anti-FoTM Prof. V
Forum Scavenger Prof. V
|
LUGMOS
Corrosive Synergy
1926
|
Posted - 2015.02.07 01:24:00 -
[24] - Quote
Templar XIII wrote:If the Scr is to be nerved in range to damage application, the Ascr needs to be buffed a mighty bit to deserve the title CQC weapon. 'Tis what I've been saying. Just not in the OP.
Official QuafeGäó Advocate
Anti-FoTM Prof. V
Forum Scavenger Prof. V
|
LUGMOS
Corrosive Synergy
1942
|
Posted - 2015.02.07 19:18:00 -
[25] - Quote
**** you idiots.
I respect Imp Smash, WeapondigitX V7, and Templar XIII. But you idiots are just as bad as people who actually QQ.
God damn you guys, I even put it in the OP now, there is no excuse.
Official QuafeGäó Advocate
Anti-FoTM Prof. V
Forum Scavenger Prof. V
|
LUGMOS
Corrosive Synergy
1942
|
Posted - 2015.02.07 19:43:00 -
[26] - Quote
Templar XIII wrote:If any reasonable conversation was ever intended, you would have left it be with your posts in the first few threads towards that topic, would have kept those alive and kicking.
This is just sad. Ever heard of compromise? Ever heard of flaws?
I had flaws in my initial argument, as would most any argument. That is why I posted in a DISCUSSION board, so the flaws could be found. I am quite accepting in my flaws in rationale, it is just stupid to be so stubborn as to try and ignore them and keep pushing your initial argument. I pride myself for trying to leave bias as much as possible from my arguments, if it does slip by, then I am only human, no?
People with mentalitites like yours are why government can be so locked up sometimes. You have to accommodate sometimes.
Official QuafeGäó Advocate
Anti-FoTM Prof. V
Forum Scavenger Prof. V
|
LUGMOS
Corrosive Synergy
1942
|
Posted - 2015.02.07 20:23:00 -
[27] - Quote
Luther Mandrix wrote: (Maybe modded controllers are the problem) Fix modded controllers before adjusting stats that are the result of mod controller using players
There's no easy way to do this...
It would require a RoF nerf, and all the people who say the ScR is perfect and not to mess with it would cri.
Official QuafeGäó Advocate
Anti-FoTM Prof. V
Forum Scavenger Prof. V
|
LUGMOS
Corrosive Synergy
1942
|
Posted - 2015.02.07 20:27:00 -
[28] - Quote
Savage Mangler wrote:I'll try to be reasonable here. A CQC nerf to the scrambler through the methof you proposed could only be allowed if there was a massive heat reduction to it or if the asscrambler was buffed to do reasonsble damage. Some racial fit purists like myself like to use the scr on our commandos or scouts, which currently is only made viable by the ability to effectively fighyt in both cqc and long-mid range due to the fact we don't get a heat reduction bonus. Even with their damage bonus and a complex damage mod a amarrian commando is still less effective at proto level than an assault. Well, I guess... And you did make it to reasonable. More than reasonable, what you say is true.
That is quite true. However, if you were to lower the heat buildup, people would cry that the ScR is OP on the Amarr Assault, which isn't too bad considering you must invest a lot of SP to get there. Plus, for arguments sake, the CR is almost to that level of "OP" on a MinAssault already, which is seemingly fine ATM.
However, my original intention is to make the AScR better at CQC than the normal variant. So if the AScR was made viable, would you use it over the normal variant?
Official QuafeGäó Advocate
Anti-FoTM Prof. V
Forum Scavenger Prof. V
|
LUGMOS
Corrosive Synergy
1974
|
Posted - 2015.02.09 00:04:00 -
[29] - Quote
Imp Smash wrote:Still, I can't imagine people hip firing the scrambler 25 meters out. If they are then there is a problem there. I don't have scramblers or ARs. can someone with a capture device do some gunfire spread testing on a wall and put up some pictures? Will do. SoonGäó
Official QuafeGäó Advocate
Anti-FoTM Prof. V
Forum Scavenger Prof. V
|
|
|
|