|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Bosse Grahn
90
   |
Posted - 2012.10.09 11:40:00 -
[1] - Quote
The subject line pretty much says it all. The SMG is virtually useless unless you surprise your enemy. Instead of just complaining about it, here's what I would like to have done about it. I've heard some of these changes brought up in different threads, but I've yet to see anything focusing solely on the SMG like this.
The first change: Increase the effective range of the SMG to be 1/3 of that of the AR
The reason: If our SMG can be used as a semi-medium ranged weapon today, then they should be at least as good if not better 20,000 years in the future.
The second change: Decrease the clip capacity by 10
The reason: Making the SMG need to be reloaded more frequently will give it a handicap that prevent's people from complaining it has become over powered.
The third change: Increase the CPU/PG usage to be halfway between an AR and a pistol.
The reason: It's heavier than a pistol and lighter than an AR, it's also often more useful that the pistol, so it only makes sense that it would cost a bit more to equip.
The fourth change: Reduce the recoil and spread significantly.
The reason: The AR users don't want a nerf, so we need something that can somewhat compete with it. The AR has virtually no recoil and no spread. Since the SMG functions in a similar manner to the AR it makes no sense for one to be uber precise and the other to spray bullets in every direction.
^I'm not requesting laser precision, but if I shoot 20 bullets at a target at 15 meters, at least 3/4 of my bullets should be able to connect if I aim well.
The fifth change: Make the ADS less obtrusive.
The reason: The ADS on the SMG is more of a hindrance than an asset with the way it is now. When you look through it the color and movement of everything behind it becomes obscured and it's distracting. Perhaps make it more transparent and reduce the amount of coloration. Also, like the shotgun, perhaps the crosshair on the ADS could show you the spread range of the gun instead of being a dot. It's easier to keep an enemy inside a circle than to keep a small dot trained on them.
Those are my suggested changes. Any input would be appreciated. |
Bosse Grahn
90
|
Posted - 2012.10.09 12:49:00 -
[2] - Quote
Wolf Ritter vonKaldari wrote:Bosse Grahn wrote:The subject line pretty much says it all. The SMG is virtually useless unless you surprise your enemy. It's almost like a pistol caliber automatic weapon is a situational piece of equipment not meant to be on an actual battlefield and compares unfavorably in both stopping power and range to rifle caliber weapons owing to lesser propellent charges and smaller mass projectiles which don't retain inertia as well as the longer rounds do, but everyone knows that's silly since an MP5K chambered for 9x19mm Parabellum has the same stopping power and range as 5.56x45mm NATO, right?
Nice, troll in the first post. Did I say anything about the stopping power? No.
IRL an SMG is way more accurate than in this game. This game is 20,000 years in the future, you think that if they have figured out how to make an AR with no recoil and no spread by then, they would have improved the SMG accuracy as well, not made it worse.
Also, they don't use ammo that we have here, these use basically the same ammunition. So your reference to different bullets doing different damage and having different stopping power is irrelevant.
Also since we are not speaking about earth weapons here, who are you to say that 20,000 years in the future that the SMG doesn't have more stopping power at close range than an AR? It's an entirely different form of amunition, and how it's cycled through the weapon can make all the difference to how much damage it does at different ranges.
Also, pistol class? No. Sub-machine gun. Not machine pistol. I know SMG's fire pistol ammo, but it's a short rifle. The line is blurred here on Earth since we have so many guns that are classified as both, but Dust has nothing to do with Earth. In EVE terms the Earth specs are less than irrelevant, they are non-existant. But since they use the term SMG I'll stick with their perception of it by them calling it such. If it's supposed to be a machine pistol, then they need to change it's ADS to match that of the scrambler pistol and call it a machine pistol. If it's supposed to be a SMG, it needs to be fixed |
Bosse Grahn
90
|
Posted - 2012.10.09 14:21:00 -
[3] - Quote
Jack McReady wrote:if we want to start about RL comparisons, then I dont agree that rifle should be better. SMG should trump AR at close range any time. I can give you some enlightenment from my RL experience I got from the austrian army.
regular rounds from pistols/smgs are not that great at piercing body armor BUT modern small calibers that some of the latest smgs use have much more stopping power, they cut through body armor like it is made out of butter and have less recoil too. they put AR stopping power into shame, they only have lower effective range because the accuracy is not on par with AR due to shorter barrels. if anything then the AR is too accurate due to lack of recoil. the AR should be able to hit well when you take time to aim and place good shots but not be a full auto sniper. the SMG should have worse base accuracy but less recoil. the range of the SMG should be increased as well.
e.g. 4,6x30 mm pierces body protection that is built by CRISAT standards even at a distance of 200m easily.
This is a game balance issue. We can have realism or we can have balance, but we cannot always have both. I agree fundamentally with your point that SMG's should trump AR's at short range, but that's a debate that AR users are fighting over tooth and nail. If you implement these changes then the AR vs.SMG issue should be more or less resolved since the SMG has a much higher rate of fire. It merely needs enough accuracy to connect with it's shots.
I do not debate anything you have said. However I will reiterate what I said just a couple posts before, this is NOT Earth tech. Earth tech is less than irrelevant to the EVE universe. The dev's use weapons similar enough to those of Earth so the FPS community isn't confused when they look at the weapons and wonder what they fire like, but the tech involved is entirely different. Different tech makes for different specs. |
Bosse Grahn
90
|
Posted - 2012.10.09 18:13:00 -
[4] - Quote
Wolf Ritter vonKaldari wrote: IRL our SMG is more accurately classified as a PDW as it's not intended to be a primary weapon, it's clearly classed as a sidearm.
It actually isn't. Pistol cartridges exist so that soldiers can have a lightweight backup weapon in case they lose their primary one or run out of ammo. This will not change in the future.
Because then it wouldn't be an SMG.
First of all a short rifle is a carbine, second I'd like to see this short rifle that is classified as an SMG you're talking about. Finally, no they don't. Sights change depending on the model of gun, manufacturer, or any other number of things.
Good god, I have to break it down again.
To your first point: The fact is that if it was supposed to be a PDW, they would/should call it a PDW. They call it an SMG, therefore it needs to have the general specs of an SMG. Also, just because it is currently resembles more closely a PDW from Earth than an SMG on Earth does not mean that in the EVE universe it is classified as a SMG. You do not dictate in the EVE universe what size an SMG can be. The laws of reality do not apply to something I like to call "Science Fiction". And yes it is classified as a sidearm, however once again neither you nor Earth science have any say over what is classified as a sidearm in the EVE universe. CCP decided that SMG's it their universe are small enough to be classified as a
Sidearm. That is their right.
To your second point: PDW bullets are indeed. Once again I point out to you that they have designated this weapon as a SMG and as such should behave like one.
To your third point: You are speaking out of your ass. You have no idea what will be the standard military equipment in 20,000 years. Hell, we don't know what warfare will look like in 200 years. They make the rules in their "Science Fiction" (remember that term, it's important when dealing with the workings of fictional science), so they can set it up however they like. Right now they are asking for input, and I gave mine.
To your fourth point: The amount of stopping power a weapon has does not have to determine what type of weapon it is. SCIENCE FICTION. If you have that big of a problem with the way they classify their weapons, then go make your own sci-fi shooter and classify them however you wish
To your last points: First off I am well aware of what a carbine is, secondly try informing yourself before you blab http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Submachine_gun (the first sentence: A submachine gun (SMG) is an automatic carbine, designed to fire pistol cartridges.), and lastly I've never seen an effective machine pistol with a massive and totally unusable ADS like what we see here.
Basically you are trying to square reality with science fiction. It doesn't work like that. |
Bosse Grahn
90
|
Posted - 2012.10.15 13:20:00 -
[5] - Quote
WARSLAVEs wrote:i agree that some balance to the SMG class is needed. Mostly I believe it to be the spread of firre as i have been point blank 5' or les in someones back and they had the chance to turn and shoot me dead. situations like that are more frequent than i cared for(was running double SMG ) i did go back to the pistol as it was a more reliable weapon for me.
now i use the SMG as a spray and pray gun. Never do i count on it. It will not guarantee me a kill no matter the range and from experience thats my take on it.
Please fix the SMG
Thank you, I feel less alone on the issue now. ^^ |
|
|
| |
|