|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
True Adamance
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
20
   |
Posted - 2015.07.27 19:54:00 -
[1] - Quote
jace silencerww wrote:think the ScR is not OP amarr users. lets look at the Scr vs Rail Rifle.
both have a 75 meters optimal range.
basic Scr dps vs armor - 520
basic RR dps vs armor - 457.35 (that is with max proficiency for the RR)
lets try the adv ones
adv Scr dps vs armor- 546
avd RR dps vs armor- 480.22 ( max proficiency with the RR)
ok what about proto ones. again same optimal range of 75 meters.
proto Scr dps vs armor - 572
proto RR dps vs armor - 503.8 (again max proficiency for the RR)
ok lets try officer ones
Officer Scr dps vs armor- 629.2 ( LOL OP MUCH)
Officer RR dps vs armor- 553.39 (max prof with the RR)
LOL look at that the Scr wins even almost has the same effective range. Scr is 96 vs Rail rifle is 100.
so an officer rail rifle does 7.39 more dps against armor than an ADV scrambler rifle. so CCP is the Scr OP or not?
don't use the overheat stuff saying it is balanced. I killed a full proto amarr sent. (full ehp) with an amarr frontline fit at 40 meters and no skills into the Scr. yes it took over one clip (as it should with any basic weapon) but I did not overheat. lol
This is what I dislike about the argument that the ScR is over powered.....that those who argue its over performance compare two very different rifle types.
Firstly know that the ScR fits squarely into the tactical rifle line and if you look at its statistics they are very well balanced against that of the Tactical AR with the same RoF, slightly more DPS vs Shields due to its profile modifiers, and a little over 100 DPS less than the Tactical AR against armored targets.
What this says to me is that with the rifle lines unfinished what we have rather than one single weapon being over powered is a lack of parity as within almost all of the rifle variations the weapons are well balanced against one another, however arguably are no well balanced against other rifle variations.
Also the assertion that the ScR should be an absolutely abysmal weapon in dealing with armor is a statement I would dispute. Sure it should have some loss of DPS against armour but never enough to render the weapon useless against armored targets.
Em shah tey et naGÇÖemsaer ek rahvi, amarr osedah gasi ubday pahk. Ekin tey vahka ijed div ema ziel. Et tey vamatal em.
|
True Adamance
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
20
|
Posted - 2015.07.27 20:11:00 -
[2] - Quote
Vesta Opalus wrote:True Adamance wrote:
This is what I dislike about the argument that the ScR is over powered.....that those who argue its over performance compare two very different rifle types.
Firstly know that the ScR fits squarely into the tactical rifle line and if you look at its statistics they are very well balanced against that of the Tactical AR with the same RoF, slightly more DPS vs Shields due to its profile modifiers, and a little over 100 DPS less than the Tactical AR against armored targets.
What this says to me is that with the rifle lines unfinished what we have rather than one single weapon being over powered is a lack of parity as within almost all of the rifle variations the weapons are well balanced against one another, however arguably are no well balanced against other rifle variations.
Also the assertion that the ScR should be an absolutely abysmal weapon in dealing with armor is a statement I would dispute. Sure it should have some loss of DPS against armour but never enough to render the weapon useless against armored targets.
Of course this post tacitly assumes that the tactical AR is balanced too, which may not be the case. We just dont see it used because the scrambler outclasses it in almost every way. But I would love to have a tac CR or tac RR, just to get armor users on board with what shield users have known for a long time now: tactical rifles are absurdly OP. I agree with you however that scrambler shouldnt be bad against armor, every weapon should be basically functional against everything else, the damage profiles should just make things marginally better (this is part of the reason I think the scrambler damage profile should be tightened up a bit, to make it easier to balance)
Indeed. I've never said that either were balanced. Both require changes of sort made to bring them more into line. My original suggestion was the one championed in this thread that I put to Kage long ago was the concept that a delay after the changed shot result in a short ion pistol like cool down.
Now I prefer mechanical changes to balancing the tactical rifles as opposed to large percentage nerfs. Heat, cool downs, etc.
That being said I feel it important to remind people the line rifles are not at a stage of parity and that within their variations they are reasonably well balanced in terms of DPS against one another and that attempting to compare weapons across variational line is rather pointless given the rifle types are trying to achieve two very different goals.
Em shah tey et naGÇÖemsaer ek rahvi, amarr osedah gasi ubday pahk. Ekin tey vahka ijed div ema ziel. Et tey vamatal em.
|
True Adamance
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
20
|
Posted - 2015.07.27 21:14:00 -
[3] - Quote
Vesta Opalus wrote:True Adamance wrote:Vesta Opalus wrote:True Adamance wrote:
This is what I dislike about the argument that the ScR is over powered.....that those who argue its over performance compare two very different rifle types.
Firstly know that the ScR fits squarely into the tactical rifle line and if you look at its statistics they are very well balanced against that of the Tactical AR with the same RoF, slightly more DPS vs Shields due to its profile modifiers, and a little over 100 DPS less than the Tactical AR against armored targets.
What this says to me is that with the rifle lines unfinished what we have rather than one single weapon being over powered is a lack of parity as within almost all of the rifle variations the weapons are well balanced against one another, however arguably are no well balanced against other rifle variations.
Also the assertion that the ScR should be an absolutely abysmal weapon in dealing with armor is a statement I would dispute. Sure it should have some loss of DPS against armour but never enough to render the weapon useless against armored targets.
Of course this post tacitly assumes that the tactical AR is balanced too, which may not be the case. We just dont see it used because the scrambler outclasses it in almost every way. But I would love to have a tac CR or tac RR, just to get armor users on board with what shield users have known for a long time now: tactical rifles are absurdly OP. I agree with you however that scrambler shouldnt be bad against armor, every weapon should be basically functional against everything else, the damage profiles should just make things marginally better (this is part of the reason I think the scrambler damage profile should be tightened up a bit, to make it easier to balance) Indeed. I've never said that either were balanced. Both require changes of sort made to bring them more into line. My original suggestion was the one championed in this thread that I put to Kage long ago was the concept that a delay after the changed shot result in a short ion pistol like cool down. Now I prefer mechanical changes to balancing the tactical rifles as opposed to large percentage nerfs. Heat, cool downs, etc. That being said I feel it important to remind people the line rifles are not at a stage of parity and that within their variations they are reasonably well balanced in terms of DPS against one another and that attempting to compare weapons across variational line is rather pointless given the rifle types are trying to achieve two very different goals. Agree with everything except the "attempting to compare weapons across variational line is rather pointless given the rifle types are trying to achieve two very different goals". In my opinion it doesnt matter what goals they are trying to achieve, since at the end of the day, the only goal that matters is murdering red people. If one line of rifles is globally better at murdering red people than other lines and there are no mitigating factors or drawbacks, then something is wrong.
Globally better is a very broad statement that really fails to account for the specific attributes of each of the variations valuable statistics. RoF, Magazine Size, Effective and Optimal Ranges..... and the fact is they attributes DO matter when speaking about the rifle variations.
I'm convinced the ScR can be over performing but I am not convinced that it is the vastly superior option over all other rifles. The question is what is it over performing compared to? And if someone were to say Rail Rifles I'd call them damn liars.
Em shah tey et naGÇÖemsaer ek rahvi, amarr osedah gasi ubday pahk. Ekin tey vahka ijed div ema ziel. Et tey vamatal em.
|
|
|
| |
|