Though we have yet to see the Laser Rifles, I want to suggest a DRM (Designated Marksman Rifle). To those of you that don't know what those are this is what they are:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Designated_marksman_rifle

I think DUST 514 would be great for one of these. Battlefield 3 had the SKS which was simply amazing. It was perfect. MAG have the T1's which Ravens and Valors were good. I think DUST 514 should have these under the sniper tree. Given they are a lot weaker then a true Sniper Rifle, the rate of fire and the large chip size make up for that and it's a great infantry weapon for those that need to be up close to support your team and at the same time take out enemies coming in for the far end. CCP you should consider this and I know a lot of other players would like this added in.

These are in the game I thought. They are the single shot high damage assault rifles.

I was just thinking yesterday, the current line of AR's are Gallente, which uses a technology that doesn't have the best range. I'll bet you that when the Caldari AR's come out, they'll have a greater range than the current TAR does, which should make a DM role more doable.

You realize, of course, that gallente and caldari both use hybrid weapons, right?

Lasers would provide the middle ground between long and short range.

I do. The difference is that the Caldari launch what is essentially a canister containing plasma that explodes on impact, while the Gallente use that canister more like how we use rounds today; they extract and launch the plasma outright, and discard the canister. The result is Gallente blaster-style weapons do more damage at a closer range, while Caldari weapons do less damage at a greater range.

Again, no. You're describing the difference between blasters and rails, both of which are hybrids, both of which are used by both caldari and gallente. Caldari ships usually receive more range bonuses, while gallente get tracking and damage bonuses, but that doesn't change the nature of the weapons, or that they're used by both.

Really, smgs should be blasters, ARs should be ACs, snipers should be rails. That would better fit their charadteristics from eve.

"...The result is a weapon that offers improved accuracy and greater containment field stability (which equates to faster, longer bursts of fire) than anything in its class.

...Charged plasma munitions are pumped into a cyclotron that converts the plasma into a highly lethal bolt before it is expelled from the chamber. Upon impact with the target, the magnetic field surrounding the bolt collapses, venting superheated plasma onto the contact point."

Taken from the description for the Assault Rifle.

These are blaster hybrids. A Caldari AR would likely be rail.

You keep repeating the same mistake. There are no "caldari hybrids," or "gallente hybrids," there ar just hybrids. They come in blaster and rail form. Caldari would also use blasters for rapid fire weapons. Rails would be used for longer range, slower firing weapons, as is the case in eve.

How often do you see blasters on a Caldari ship? Rails on a Gallente?

No, there aren't Gallente hybrids and Caldari hybrids. But each type is clearly favored by one side or the other. Caldari very well could have a DMR style gun, an AR with a slower firing rate.

They could, and it would be a rail and a sniper, not a baster and af. Just as the gallente can have the same. Furthermore, plenty of good railfits for gallente.

You're conflating aspects and stats and story. The gallente are more likely to use a blaster (though they use both), the caldari to use rails (though they use both). You're trying to say a caldari AR would behave different, when it wouldn't, as it'd still be a blaster, not a rail. And as i said, ac's would better fit the role of AR, while blasters cover smgs, and rails your sniper and other long-range rifles. Artillery and missiles are obvious. Lasers will be an interesting combination, with pulse falling between AR amd rail range, and beam hitting the upper end of that same range.

What you're not understanding is that I'm saying for hybrids what you're saying for energy weapons; the only difference is blasters and rails vs pulse and beam. I still think it's feasible, so we may just have to agree to disagree.

Uhhh, no, I'm not... lol

How am I saying that just because Race X makes it, it completely changes the nature, behavior, and stats of the weapon type?

Pulse lasers have longer range and less damage than blasters. Beam lasers have shorter range and more damage than rails. This isn't news, this isn't rocket science.

As they fit into infantry weapons, lasers will be interesting BECAUSE blasters fit the SMG role perfectly, rails fit the sniper role perfectly, ACs the AR role perfectly, and artillery and missiles stand on their own. Reevaluating, lasers would probably do better to mimic BattleTech more than EVE, and have them as their own weapon type (like forge guns and mass drivers; a pulse laser might actually fit the AR role better than ACs, but a beam would do well to be a solid, constant beam you can "walk" over a target, like in MechWarrior 3).

In any case, your post I just quoted just doesn't make any sense. How am I conflating those things? I explained where your description was flawed without ever mentioning lasers. I then went on to describe the ideal roles for the weapon types based on how they're supposed to work in the lore, and their stats and relations in EVE. The two were separate points.

Ok, let me put it this way.

Imagine a world where every type of weapons system has its own version in AR's. There is one type for AC's, one for artillery. One type for pulse, one type for beam. One type for blasters, one type for railguns. Currently we just have the blaster type.

Now imagine in that same world, we have different types of SMGs. One type for AC's, one type for pulse, one type for blasters. We already have an AC type.

Also, we have different types of SR's. One type for artillery, one type for beam, one type for rails. We already have a rail type.

THAT is what I'm saying. It really, really isn't that hard to understand. I honestly can't think of a more simple way to state it. If you don't agree, then you're entitled to your own opinion and I won't push the matter further.

MASSIVE SPACESHIP MOUNTED WEAPONS IN EVE ONLINE BEHAVE SORT OF LIKE THIS THEREFORE HERE IS A 5,000 WORD WALL OF MOONLOGIC EXPLAINING WHY THE CALDARI WOULDN'T HAVE A NON-BLASTER ASSAULT RIFLE

Ok, I thought that might be what you were saying. That's freaking r-tarded (goddamned censor). You're basically saying to completely ignore all the characteristics of those weapon types just so that each "class" (assault rifle, SMG, sniper, etc.) of weapon has a version from each weapon type, in spite of the fact that those different weapon types don't even remotely fit into those particular weapon classes.

Seriously, you want artillery-type assault rifle? Do I even need to explain how ridiculous and absurd that is? What will you do? Aim 45 degrees into the sky and have fully automatic fire maybe arc to where you wanted it to land?

Blasters are close-range, rapid fire. They have the highest damage per second output. This makes them ideal for SMGs, which put a lot of lead in the air, but don't do well at medium or longer ranges.

ACs and pulse lasers have moderate range and decent damage output, as well as decent accuracy, making them excellent fits for assault rifles.

Rails are very slow to refire, have ok damage per shot, and the longest range around. They're clearly ideal for sniper rifles and similar (like the DMR this thread is supposed to be about).

Artillery are just that: artillery. Parabolic trajectory projectiles. Best implementation would be like the Vanguard's main gun in PlanetSide, and maybe some actual forward-spotted artillery like in World of Tanks (or that one vehicle in PlanetSide, can't remember the name, where if someone used a special module to laze a target, it'd show a dot in the sky for where to aim to make your projectile arc to that lazed point).

Missiles don't require explanation (though given your post, I assume you want a missile-based assault rifle too, right?)

Simply put, an aritllery-style AR would simply be large caliber. The idea here would be that you have SMG's and SR's on either extreme, and various AR's running the gambit in between. Just as these different turret styles take up different amounts of PG and CPU in EVE, and thus are better suited to particular racial ships, these weapons too would vary and be better fitted on different racial dropsuits.

And no, missiles clearly have no place in AR's. I'm trying to be civil, please pay the same respect.

EDIT: Thank you, Mr. Shooter. Should have referenced that vid a long time ago.

I am being civil, but you're being ridiculous. Pulse lasers actually seem to be the best suited to fit an AR role, due to the medium range and rapid firing. Beam lasers fall more in line with a sniper (probably perfect for the DMR the OP wants, since they don't have the range of rails, but they fire more often). Artillery IS just that: artillery. It's not "a higher calibre" it's a huge ass cannon which, in gravity, fires a shell (technically a volkswagen, since it's minmatar) on a parabolic trajectory. There's no getting around this and making it not sound like a Star Trek explanation.

ACs seem like they'd fit well as the HMGs and vehicle-mounted MGs (in fact, isn't the current HMG of minmatar design?)

Artillery is artillery. Full-stop. Making "artillery-type assault rifles" is just as logical as making "missile-type assault rifles." That is to say, it isn't logical.

I'm not sure if you really know as much about EVE as you seem to think you do, based on your assertions about racial weapon tendencies, and your seeming lack of knowledge about what these weapon types are or how they work...

So i just spent the last 15 minutes thoroughly destroying all of your failed and flawed points only to have the forums eat it, then save your quote as the new draft.

...
...
...

Really pissed it ate my post, because this doesn't leave me satisfied, but I really don't feel like typing another 6k characters.