DUST Search - Duvolle Assault Rifle

All Channels

General Discussions

Duvolle Assault Rifle

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 2 post(s)
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 8376	Posted - 2015.05.04 23:27:00 - [211] - Quote The gallente rifles suffer from one single major problem. and one minor problem. the minor problem is scrams out-DPS them. The major problem is every weapon in the game except for the HMG and shotgun outrange them. it's pretty much that simple. None of the rifles will ever be balanced, because all of the rifles use different balancing metrics. Until the balancing metrics are streamlined (and hard rules applied) then the AR will never get balanced against the other rifles simply because it has no range. There's never enough sh**posting going on, so let's add a few more teaspoons of the guy posting after me to the recipie!
MINA Longstrike Kirjuun Heiian 2958	Posted - 2015.05.04 23:27:00 - [212] - Quote Sgt Kirk wrote: Just to clear things up in Mina's post. No one here is saying the Gallente Assault is bad. It's a good suit, the issue that's being discussed is just the Rifle and the suit's bonus. The Gallente Assault is a damn good suit by itself. Fair enough, I'll try to stop beating that horse. I'm trying not to get frustrated here, but the simple idea of performance nerfs to other weapons makes me sick. I very much feel that the damage / range scale is off and something like breakin stuffs earlier proposal could do some work to fix it, with a few stipulations like semi auto (tactical) weapons having higher paper DPS because the vast majority don't actualize their potential. Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian. I have a few alts.
Sgt Kirk Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 10577	Posted - 2015.05.04 23:28:00 - [213] - Quote Damn, you are getting too bent out about this. I may be vivid in my emotions but contrary to what my post may sound like a loss of respect certainly doesn't happen just because someone's thought process is in a different area than my own. Sgt Kirk's Gallente Propaganda Youtube Channel
SHADOWBlood ASSASSIN The Hundred Acre Hood Rise Of Legion. 105	Posted - 2015.05.04 23:29:00 - [214] - Quote Someone please tell me how such a stupid thread picked up 211 replies? If you look at the original post...... Just no. My worst DUST experience? Having my dropship crush my Scotsman's with a Roden Sniper. THAT was a fun day...
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 9417	Posted - 2015.05.04 23:30:00 - [215] - Quote MINA Longstrike wrote: Adipem Nothi wrote: MINA Longstrike wrote: Your support of wanting to make a ton of weapons perform worse just so that a few can shine in comparison is causing me to quickly lose respect for you. Harming the vast majority of the playerbase to content a much smaller faction is bad and wrong. The correct solution to this is a functioning dps <--> range scale. I proposed this as a spitball alternative to changing GalAssault bonus and/or tuning the AR, because I can't think of any other tenable solutions to the specialization problem. "Spitballing" doesn't qualify as "support" ... we're brainstorming here. That you'd even consider it causes me concern. We spitball the wall. We put an option up, hate it as we may. We agree that its a non-option or a bad option. We discuss why. We rule it out, we move on, and we make progress. Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley
MINA Longstrike Kirjuun Heiian 2958	Posted - 2015.05.04 23:34:00 - [216] - Quote Sgt Kirk wrote: Damn, you are getting too bent out about this. I may be vivid in my emotions but contrary to what my post may sound like a loss of respect certainly doesn't happen just because someone's thought process is in a different area than my own. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oppositional_defiant_disorder I am part of the 10% lifetime persistency group. I am getting frustrated because (to me) Adipem Nothi is in support of something that is disgustingly bad, harmful and wrong and he seemingly cant see the flaws in it. Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian. I have a few alts.
Sgt Kirk Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 10577	Posted - 2015.05.04 23:36:00 - [217] - Quote MINA Longstrike wrote: Sgt Kirk wrote: Damn, you are getting too bent out about this. I may be vivid in my emotions but contrary to what my post may sound like a loss of respect certainly doesn't happen just because someone's thought process is in a different area than my own. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oppositional_defiant_disorder I am part of the 10% lifetime persistency group. I am getting frustrated because (to me) Adipem Nothi is in support of something that is disgustingly bad, harmful and wrong and he seemingly cant see the flaws in it. Loool well ya know to me he's got a track record with not seeing things that are wrong. clicks link Sgt Kirk's Gallente Propaganda Youtube Channel
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 9424	Posted - 2015.05.05 11:49:00 - [218] - Quote MINA Longstrike wrote: Sgt Kirk wrote: Damn, you are getting too bent out about this. I may be vivid in my emotions but contrary to what my post may sound like a loss of respect certainly doesn't happen just because someone's thought process is in a different area than my own. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oppositional_defiant_disorder I am part of the 10% lifetime persistency group. I am getting frustrated because (to me) Adipem Nothi is in support of something that is disgustingly bad, harmful and wrong and he seemingly cant see the flaws in it. What am I in support of, again? At Short Range: Short Range Rifles > Med/Long Range Rifles At Med/Long Range: Med/Long Range Rifles > Short Range Rifles ^ Now this is disgustingly bad, harmful and wrong ... because why? MINA Longstrike wrote: Harming the vast majority of the playerbase to content a much smaller faction is bad and wrong. So ... * AR-514 was good and right; fixing it was bad and wrong? * MN Assaults are good and right; fixing them would be bad and wrong? Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley
MINA Longstrike Kirjuun Heiian 2960	Posted - 2015.05.05 13:06:00 - [219] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: What am I in support of, again? At Short Range: Short Range Rifles > Med/Long Range Rifles At Med/Long Range: Med/Long Range Rifles > Short Range Rifles ^ Now this is disgustingly bad, harmful and wrong ... because why? You are taking my words out of context Nothi and twisting them to say things that I haven't, you are compounding this by overly simplifying your own arguments so that it seems like I'm attacking the whole idea instead of the specifics. This is called strawmanning. I must repeat what kirk has said, for someone who apparently prides themselves on being a voice of reason, you are debating in extremely poor taste and have seemingly set out to try and make me 'wrong'. I have been talking about your statement of hitting weapons performance instead of their dps. To me, performance means things like kick, dispersion etcetera. Making a weapons performance function badly outside of its 'intended' range because reasons is a terrible approach to balance, the correct metric should be a properly scaled range vs dps function. Adipem Nothi wrote: MINA Longstrike wrote: Harming the vast majority of the playerbase to content a much smaller faction is bad and wrong. So ... * AR-514 was good and right; fixing it was bad and wrong? * MN Assaults are good and right; fixing them would be bad and wrong? Cherrypick and strawman harder prick. These 'points' are distractionary ad-hominem and non-discussion. You are trying to avoid engaging with my points by instead calling me a hypocrite and criticizing me. Try actually defending your arguments in a rational manner. I have never said anything about ar514, ever, and I will not discuss this with you. I do not see any progression to this discussion until you stop littering it with logical fallacies and quoting me out of context. If you're trying to ** me off by acting like a jackass you've succeeded you can have alllllllllllll the internet points for it. Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian.** I have a few alts.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 8389	Posted - 2015.05.05 13:20:00 - [220] - Quote But I wanted to be the one to make you lose your cool! There's never enough sh**posting going on, so let's add a few more teaspoons of the guy posting after me to the recipie!

Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 9425	Posted - 2015.05.05 13:23:00 - [221] - Quote Here's my take on your angst, Mina, and why I think you and I aren't seeing eye-to-eye. You were upset when the long range Rail Rifle became less effective at close range; I can dig up quotes if you like. In those quotes, you refer to the RR and other rifles as "service rifles" because you believe that rifles should be deadly effective at a wide variety of ranges. In the Fine Rifle model, there are no short or long range rifles; all rifles are "every range rifles" with DPS scaled against maximum range. The Fine Rifle model is a very popular one, as it makes for more versatile and effective rifles; this sounds good to the vast majority of player base (who happen to run rifles). Those who subscribe to this model take issue when rifles are labeled either "short range rifles" or "long range rifles" because these labels imply functional limitations. What gets Fine Rifle proponents more upset and vocal than an implied functional limitation is an actual functional limitation; like when Rattati tuned the Rail Rifle, and it lost it the ability to compete in CQC. You (Mina) feel that the functional limitations applied to the Rail Rifle were unfair; you would like to see the Rail Rifle's capacity for CQC restored, and you're a proponent of the model described above. Here's where you and I stop seeing eye-to-eye. The Fine Rifle model puts rifleman at significant advantage over all other types of combatants. In a balanced Dust, all weapons are viable and no weapon type carries with it a massive advantage over the next. In a balanced Dust, there is no room for a weapon or group of weapons which has substantially fewer limitations than the next. The "jack of all trade" concept works if and only if that jack is substantially inferior to less versatile weaponry. I don't agree that a long range rifleman should be able to readily able to "defend himself" when caught offguard in CQC. He should should have to switch to close-range sidearm just like a guy with a Laser Rifle, Sniper Rifle or Forge gun. I don't agree that a short range rifleman should be able to gun down low-HP units at med/long range; he should have to switch to a long-range sidearm, just like a guy with an HMG, Knives or a Shotgun. Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley
MINA Longstrike Kirjuun Heiian 2960	Posted - 2015.05.05 13:24:00 - [222] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: But I wanted to be the one to make you lose your cool! Plz no. I'm already about two steps away from punching something and it's going to take me about two-three hours to calm down. Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian. I have a few alts.
MINA Longstrike Kirjuun Heiian 2960	Posted - 2015.05.05 13:26:00 - [223] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: aghblrugausdnawuebdfuabwdedauwdubgueberauwduawfbwauebyfhgurblrurlburblrubhrblrubhrgualbrughrlgurbhrlgurghbrugr I am a huge jackass Look guys! I can argue like nothi! For the record, I have almost zero interest in what you have to say anymore no matter how well you try to present it. I was not the person to first descend to strawmanning and ad hominem in our discussion and I have zero respect for people who want to 'win' arguments and go about that by setting out to ** the person they're discussing with off. Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian.** I have a few alts.
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 9425	Posted - 2015.05.05 13:28:00 - [224] - Quote MINA Longstrike wrote: Adipem Nothi wrote: aghblrugausdnawuebdfuabwdedauwdubgueberauwduawfbwauebyfhgurblrurlburblrubhrblrubhrgualbrughrlgurbhrlgurghbrugr I am a huge jackass Look guys! I can argue like nothi! Read it. Think about it. Grow up. Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley
MINA Longstrike Kirjuun Heiian 2960	Posted - 2015.05.05 13:33:00 - [225] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: MINA Longstrike wrote: Adipem Nothi wrote: aghblrugausdnawuebdfuabwdedauwdubgueberauwduawfbwauebyfhgurblrurlburblrubhrblrubhrgualbrughrlgurbhrlgurghbrugr I am a huge jackass Look guys! I can argue like nothi! Read it. Think about it. Grow up. Ah yes, tell me to grow up after you try your damnedest to make me angry. Put yourself WAY up on that moral high ground. Do you need someone to pat your back for you? You "won" by making the other person not willing to engage with you anymore Nothi! you should feel proud that you took a debate and reduced it to namecalling and other juvenile idiocy! Isn't this the exact reaction you wanted? No? Maybe you shouldn't have tried to elicit that response then. If you don't want to discuss things with me in a respectful manner, I have no interest in discussing things with you in a respectful manner. Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian. I have a few alts.
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 9425	Posted - 2015.05.05 13:36:00 - [226] - Quote MINA Longstrike wrote: You are taking my words out of context Nothi and twisting them to say things that I haven't, you are compounding this by overly simplifying your own arguments so that it seems like I'm attacking the whole idea instead of the specifics. This is called strawmanning. I must repeat what kirk has said, for someone who apparently prides themselves on being a voice of reason, you are debating in extremely poor taste and have seemingly set out to try and make me 'wrong'. I have been talking about your statement of hitting weapons performance instead of their dps. To me, performance means things like kick, dispersion etcetera. Making a weapons performance function badly outside of its 'intended' range because reasons is a terrible approach to balance, the correct metric should be a properly scaled range vs dps function. My argument (at the moment) is a quite simple one. A Rail Rifle which works well in close quarters is a Fine Rifle. An Assault Rifle which works well at range is a Fine Rifle. Fine Rifles afford their users massive advantage over all other types of combatants. Massive advantages aren't good for balance. MINA Longstrike wrote: Cherrypick and strawman harder prick. These 'points' are distractionary ad-hominem, non-discussion and a logical fallacy wombo-combo: being outright loaded questions, false dilemas, strawmanning and more. This is an incredibly manipulative line of 'argument', you are trying to avoid engaging with my points by instead calling me a hypocrite and criticizing me. Try actually defending your arguments instead of attacking people who see flaws with them. I have never said anything about ar514, ever, and I will not discuss this with you. I do not see any progression to this discussion until you stop littering it with logical fallacies and quoting me out of context, I have tried to engage with you in good nature, you are clearly not interested in extending the same courtesy. If you're trying to ** me off by acting like a jackass you've succeeded you can have alllllllllllll the internet points for it. There's no logical fallacy. Your words: MINA Longstrike wrote:** Harming the vast majority of the playerbase to content a much smaller faction is bad and wrong. If the vast majority of the players are running around in FoTM gear, would it be bad and wrong to nerf FoTM gear? The point here is that your argument is poor. Balance doesn't care about minorities or majorities. Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley
MINA Longstrike Kirjuun Heiian 2960	Posted - 2015.05.05 13:42:00 - [227] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: There's no logical fallacy. Your words: MINA Longstrike wrote: Harming the vast majority of the playerbase to content a much smaller faction is bad and wrong . If the vast majority of the players is running around in FoTM gear, what happens when we nerf FoTM gear? Yep, my words. Removed completely and wholly from their context. It's almost like when you remove things from the surrounding context you can misconstrue them to mean absolutely anything you want them to mean. Especially when you oversimplify your own arguments so as to remove the possibility of disagreeing with them without seeming absolutely insane and ridiculous. Why are you still trying to argue this with me nothi, I already told you, you 'won', I no longer want to discuss things with you. Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian. I have a few alts.
DeathwindRising ROGUE RELICS 1022	Posted - 2015.05.05 13:47:00 - [228] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: The gallente rifles suffer from one single major problem. and one minor problem. the minor problem is scrams out-DPS them. The major problem is every weapon in the game except for the HMG and shotgun outrange them. it's pretty much that simple. None of the rifles will ever be balanced, because all of the rifles use different balancing metrics. Until the balancing metrics are streamlined (and hard rules applied) then the AR will never get balanced against the other rifles simply because it has no range. lets stop BSing each other here.... just increase the damage already. if it turns out to be too good, then we either tone the damage down again or make its effective range 40m to 50m or 60m, instead of 70m
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 8390	Posted - 2015.05.05 14:01:00 - [229] - Quote You can fine rifle the game and separate out the specialist and heavy weapons for other roles and balance points. Citing fine rifles and not msking that distinction obfuscates the issue. A battle rifle is a battle rifle is a battle rifle. The decision of which to puck should be according to the character of playstyle, not according to the revolving door of superiority weve had for two years. The problem adipem is you're not allowing for variant in your argument. Fine rifle is an excellent metric for main battle rifles so long as there is a logical curcurve to range and DPS that is universal. You are using it in the context of ALL weapons conforming to fine rifle. Unfortunately this is where most shooters fall flat. Weapons for different roles like nade launchers cannot be balanced as rifles and be usable as distinct and discrete units on the field. Bluntly while I do disagree with Mina ogon a few pounts, usually frequently and loudly, your fine rifle argument fails in DUST due to profiles alone. Even if you make every rifle a baseline 450 DPS the profiles will year that DPS count up or down eildly based on profile. I made this point earlier. Guess you missed/ignored it. But Realistically at this point your arguments are pushing past useful and more into the realm of fantasy. Please come back to reality for a moment so the conversation can continue. There's never enough sh**posting going on, so let's add a few more teaspoons of the guy posting after me to the recipie!
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 9427	Posted - 2015.05.05 16:51:00 - [230] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: You can fine rifle the game and separate out the specialist and heavy weapons for other roles and balance points. Citing fine rifles and not making that distinction obfuscates the issue. A battle rifle is a battle rifle is a battle rifle. I disagree. I believe that balance is better off without jack-of-all-trade Fine Rifles. Long-range rifles performing slightly worse than short-range rifles in close quarters might balance out in an Assault v Assault or Assault v Heavy setting. But it doesn't balance out with low-HP units. To a Scout, slightly worse performance translates to dying at, say, 0.75 seconds rather than 0.50 seconds. To a unit who's frantically trying to chop away at a hitpoint gap of 200% to 300%, that 0.25 seconds is imperceptible. CQC Scouts dying to a long-range Assaults in close quarters is just as imbalanced as CQC Assaults dying to long-range Assaults in close quarters. There's more at play here than weapon balance; role balance is also at issue. We toss around more palatable terms like "battle rifle" or "service rifle", but the reality is, effective-at-every-range Fine Rifles are bad for balance and bad for battlefield diversity. Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley

Vesta Opalus Ostrakon Agency Gallente Federation 657	Posted - 2015.05.05 17:57:00 - [231] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: Did Rail Rifle usage drop once it lost its Fine Rifle status? Absolutely. But did it break? Absolutely not. Despite its new-found lack of CQC prowess, the Rail Rifle remains a very popular weapon; it's presently in the Top 3. It doesnt matter how popular it is, its junk now. It cant compete in close range against anything (I'd rather have an SMG), and it cant compete at long range with the ASCR/SCR. At its absolute longest range, as you start losing damage from exceeding your optimal, it might win over an ASCR but still gets wrecked by the tactical, and in addition you start losing any realistic chance of killing whatever you are shooting at before it gets into cover because of long range damage loss. I mean sure, against run of the mill pub idiots, its still fine, but if you are fighting against someone who is dangerous, at any range, I would rather have any of the other rifles, without exception, than the breach rail rifle. Also about nerfing other weapons short range performance to buff the AR: this also buffs other short range weapons, such as the HMG, shotgun, every sidearm, mass driver, etc. I'd rather have AR balance be handled by making changes to the AR itself.
Sgt Kirk Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 10585	Posted - 2015.05.05 18:06:00 - [232] - Quote Vesta, it not being able to compete with the Scrambler is more so on the fault of the Scramblers being OP currently than the Rail Rifle sucking. The next hotfix will tone Scramblers down. Sgt Kirk's Gallente Propaganda Youtube Channel
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 8408	Posted - 2015.05.05 18:08:00 - [233] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: You can fine rifle the game and separate out the specialist and heavy weapons for other roles and balance points. Citing fine rifles and not making that distinction obfuscates the issue. A battle rifle is a battle rifle is a battle rifle. randomized crap having little/nothing to do with my post. Did you bother to read my posts on the topic or did you skip right to "Oh look, Mina posted after, let's make her madder by posting ad hominem. There's never enough sh**posting going on, so let's add a few more teaspoons of the guy posting after me to the recipie!
Vesta Opalus Ostrakon Agency Gallente Federation 657	Posted - 2015.05.05 18:09:00 - [234] - Quote Sgt Kirk wrote: Vesta, it not being able to compete with the Scrambler is more so on the fault of the Scramblers being OP currently than the Rail Rifle sucking. The next hotfix will tone Scramblers down. I agree, but its still a big component in the current balance for the breach RR.
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 9430	Posted - 2015.05.05 18:11:00 - [235] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Adipem Nothi wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: You can fine rifle the game and separate out the specialist and heavy weapons for other roles and balance points. Citing fine rifles and not making that distinction obfuscates the issue. A battle rifle is a battle rifle is a battle rifle. randomized crap having little/nothing to do with my post. Did you bother to read my posts on the topic or did you skip right to "Oh look, Mina posted after, let's make her madder by posting ad hominem. Look up "ad hominem" in a dictionary, then point out for me the "ad hominem" in my post. You claim that my position on Fine Rifles is removed from reality; I wholeheartedly disagree. You claim that Fine Rifles are fine so long as "there is a logical curve to range and DPS that is universal"; I wholeheartedly disagree. There's nothing fine about Fine Rifles. In my post, I explain some of the reasons why. I've not personally attacked you or Mina or anyone else. Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 8408	Posted - 2015.05.05 18:17:00 - [236] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: Adipem Nothi wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: You can fine rifle the game and separate out the specialist and heavy weapons for other roles and balance points. Citing fine rifles and not making that distinction obfuscates the issue. A battle rifle is a battle rifle is a battle rifle. randomized crap having little/nothing to do with my post. Did you bother to read my posts on the topic or did you skip right to "Oh look, Mina posted after, let's make her madder by posting ad hominem. Look up "ad hominem" in a dictionary, then point out for me the "ad hominem" in my post. You claim the my position on Fine Rifles is removed from reality; I wholeheartedly disagree. You claim that Fine Rifles are fine so long as "there is a logical curve to range and DPS that is universal"; I wholeheartedly disagree. now prove your thesis. Disagreeing is not enough unless you care to walk away. I have presented arguments (which you ignored) and I have made a post (which you responded to by cherrypicking bits you wanted to poke at while ignoring the rest, and the context, absolutely doing everything Mina accuses you of) stating a position. You don't get to simply choose parts of an argument to pick apart without addressing the rest of the argument in context. Oh and "fine rifle" is a lie. CCP's profiles alone on the weapons will create four WILDLY different performances overall even if you set every base stat identically. You like the Nerf/buff merry-go-round. Some of us think it's idiotic and would like the rifles to follow a logical progression so that choice of weapon reprersents a choice of playstyle rather than a shoehorn of "You must do it this way" There's never enough sh**posting going on, so let's add a few more teaspoons of the guy posting after me to the recipie!
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 9430	Posted - 2015.05.05 18:30:00 - [237] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Oh and "fine rifle" is a lie. CCP's profiles alone on the weapons will create four WILDLY different performances overall even if you set every base stat identically. You like the Nerf/buff merry-go-round. Some of us think it's idiotic and would like the rifles to follow a logical progression so that choice of weapon reprersents a choice of playstyle rather than a shoehorn of "You must do it this way" Variations in performance might be "wildly different" and readily observed at 1000+ HP, but they are imperceptible at 200-300HP. Again, we're talking about TTKs measuring in fractions of a second. It takes 5 Rail Rifle blasts to kill a Scout; damage profiles, range profiles, the race of the scout ... none of these matter. It takes 5 blasts. If those 5 blasts are readily delivered from the hip in CQC, they will be, just like they were before, and the CQC Scout will be at significant disadvantage against long-range rail rifleman in CQC. Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley
Vesta Opalus Ostrakon Agency Gallente Federation 657	Posted - 2015.05.05 18:50:00 - [238] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: Oh and "fine rifle" is a lie. CCP's profiles alone on the weapons will create four WILDLY different performances overall even if you set every base stat identically. You like the Nerf/buff merry-go-round. Some of us think it's idiotic and would like the rifles to follow a logical progression so that choice of weapon reprersents a choice of playstyle rather than a shoehorn of "You must do it this way" Variations in performance might be "wildly different" and readily observed at 1000+ HP, but they are imperceptible at 200-300HP. Again, we're talking about TTKs measuring in fractions of a second. It takes ~5 Rail Rifle blasts to kill a Scout; damage profiles, range profiles, the race of the scout ... none of these matter. It takes ~5 blasts. If those ~5 blasts are readily delivered from the hip in CQC, they will be, just like they were before, and the CQC Scout will be at significant disadvantage against long-range units in CQC. The only ways to balance low-HP Scouts against Fine Rifles would be to normalize HP levels, buff alpha weaponry, or nerf fine rifles across the board. None of these options are efficient, and all of these options run high risk of doing more harm to balance than good. Can we define the concept of Fine Rifles again here? Or point me to where its defined, and what the alternatives are? All I get so far is that its a set of rifles that are largely identical aside from dps v. range which can basically be graphed against each other in a linear and inverse progression. Not sure this matches the Dust situation since actual behavior of the gun is pretty different for each rifle.
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 9430	Posted - 2015.05.05 19:08:00 - [239] - Quote Vesta Opalus wrote: Adipem Nothi wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: Oh and "fine rifle" is a lie. CCP's profiles alone on the weapons will create four WILDLY different performances overall even if you set every base stat identically. You like the Nerf/buff merry-go-round. Some of us think it's idiotic and would like the rifles to follow a logical progression so that choice of weapon reprersents a choice of playstyle rather than a shoehorn of "You must do it this way" Variations in performance might be "wildly different" and readily observed at 1000+ HP, but they are imperceptible at 200-300HP. Again, we're talking about TTKs measuring in fractions of a second. It takes ~5 Rail Rifle blasts to kill a Scout; damage profiles, range profiles, the race of the scout ... none of these matter. It takes ~5 blasts. If those ~5 blasts are readily delivered from the hip in CQC, they will be, just like they were before, and the CQC Scout will be at significant disadvantage against long-range units in CQC. The only ways to balance low-HP Scouts against Fine Rifles would be to normalize HP levels, buff alpha weaponry, or nerf fine rifles across the board. None of these options are efficient, and all of these options run high risk of doing more harm to balance than good. Can we define the concept of Fine Rifles again here? Or point me to where its defined, and what the alternatives are? All I get so far is that its a set of rifles that are largely identical aside from dps v. range which can basically be graphed against each other in a linear and inverse progression. Not sure this matches the Dust situation since actual behavior of the gun is pretty different for each rifle. Fine Rifles (aka service rifles, battle rifles, every-range rifles) Rifles which deal damage effectively and reliably from 0m to maximum range without mechanical limitations/restrictions to hipfire, dispersion, falloff, kick, etc. They are balanced against one another by a inverse scale of DPS to Range. Functionally speaking, the 75m rail rifle is just as reliable from the hip as the 40m AR; what sets the AR apart from the RR in CQC is that the AR's damage output exceeds the RR's. If an AR unit and an RR unit have similar HP profiles and are fighting at 60m, the RR unit will win far more often than not. If an AR unit and RR unit have similar HP profiles and are fighting at 20m, the AR unit will win far more often than not. As maximum range goes up, DPS goes down. ^ That's the best I can do off-hand :-) Example: For quite some time, the Rail Rifle was extremely reliable from the hip. Rattati varied from Fine Rifle model when implemented an increase in hipfire dispersion. This mechanical limitation cut away at its effectiveness in CQC. The RR remains competitive at longer range engagements and when aiming-down-sights, but its users are now best served by a sidearm when caught off-guard in close quarters. Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley
Tweaksz Titans of Phoenix RUST415 217	Posted - 2015.05.05 21:19:00 - [240] - Quote The matter of fact is rattati knows the AR is underperforming in it's niche and needs a buff nothing you will say will change his mind. It is obvious to everyone else I just can't understand why Nothi is so salty about a minor dps change. Pill Popping Madness!



Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 :: 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.