| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| 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. |
Wolf Ritter vonKaldari
Zumari Force Projection
Caldari State
97
|
Posted - 2012.10.09 12:03:00 -
[2] - Quote
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? |
Bosse Grahn
90
|
Posted - 2012.10.09 12:49:00 -
[3] - 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 |
Alshadow
Amarr Templars
Amarr Empire
71
|
Posted - 2012.10.09 13:25:00 -
[4] - Quote
now that theres a class that starts with SMG skills, and also considering that that class is meant to use logi suits, i think the smg needs to be a more independant weapon,
the only changes i really want for it is a massive increase to range, but also a sizeable increase to recoil, that way it wont be OP at range, but it can still hurt, and it would still be best off in cqb
edit.
adding more recoil to the gun would be to prevent people from firing full auto at someone whos far away and land every hit,
the reason i wouldnt choose to have less accuracy is because i would like to be able to fire in small bursts and still land hits |
Jack McReady
A.C.M.E Corp
71
|
Posted - 2012.10.09 14:02:00 -
[5] - Quote
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. |
Bosse Grahn
90
|
Posted - 2012.10.09 14:21:00 -
[6] - 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. |
Wolf Ritter vonKaldari
Zumari Force Projection
Caldari State
97
|
Posted - 2012.10.09 16:17:00 -
[7] - Quote
Bosse Grahn wrote:IRL an SMG is way more accurate than in this game. 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.
Quote:Also, they don't use ammo that we have here, these use basically the same ammunition. PDW bullets are basically the same as rifle bullets too. Quote:So your reference to different bullets doing different damage and having different stopping power is irrelevant. 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.
Quote: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. Because then it wouldn't be an SMG.
Quote: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 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.
|
Necrodermis
GunFall Mobilization
Covert Intervention
460
|
Posted - 2012.10.09 16:35:00 -
[8] - Quote
they already tried giving SMGs actual damage. problem is it made them way more effective than a AR.
you also have to think about it this way. you are shooting another armored person. the little power the SMG takes isn't going to do a whole lot. |
Alshadow
Amarr Templars
Amarr Empire
71
|
Posted - 2012.10.09 17:10:00 -
[9] - Quote
Necrodermis wrote:they already tried giving SMGs actual damage. problem is it made them way more effective than a AR.
you also have to think about it this way. you are shooting another armored person. the little power the SMG takes isn't going to do a whole lot.
no one is asking for more damage, just more flexibility, we want to be able to actually hurt ppl with the smg from more than 15ft away, i honestly think that if the logi class starts with smg skills then the smg should be able to be an independant gun that is useable by more than just scouts |
Avenger 245
Crux Special Tasks Group
Gallente Federation
477
|
Posted - 2012.10.09 17:13:00 -
[10] - Quote
Smg pretty impressive no change, went 6/0 in 40 seconds with one in militia gear, try side arm damage mods, the 2nd SMG skil and weaponry skill your talking the same damage as a AR. Its good as is, standard AR does 30 dmg the model of SMG does near 20 dmg 25% dmg from skill, weaponry 15% dmg, and 10% complex mod that's a lot of damage |
|
|
Alshadow
Amarr Templars
Amarr Empire
71
|
Posted - 2012.10.09 17:17:00 -
[11] - Quote
Avenger 245 wrote:Smg pretty impressive no change, went 6/0 in 40 seconds with one in militia gear, try side arm damage mods, the 2nd SMG skil and weaponry skill your talking the same damage as a AR. Its good as is, standard AR does 30 dmg the model of SMG does near 20 dmg 25% dmg from skill, weaponry 15% dmg, and 10% complex mod that's a lot of damage
your comparing an smg with a very skilled up character to an AR user with no skills, thats not exactly a fair comparison. |
Bosse Grahn
90
|
Posted - 2012.10.09 18:13:00 -
[12] - 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. |
Ten-Sidhe
Osmon Surveillance
Caldari State
414
|
Posted - 2012.10.09 20:21:00 -
[13] - Quote
The ar and smg are not using the same technology.
Assault rifle is using gallente/caldari hybrid technology, plasma cartridge, shooting magnetically enclosed plasma ball. Not really a rifle at all, just called that for the role it serves.
The smg is firing a projectile, probably with some small explosive in it, not enough to cause splash.
The ar should have more recoil with low skills, and end up where it is now with lv5 ar op. The smg and other projectile should be higher recoil.
We will eventually have a projectile based rifle, maybe something saw or m-60 like. This would be easier to compare with smg.
|
Audio Mental
Seituoda Taskforce Command
Caldari State
4
|
Posted - 2012.10.09 22:51:00 -
[14] - Quote
The smg works great for a backup weapon and even a support weapon. Its not a weapon I would use as a primary on an assault build but it works great as a lower pg/cpu weapon on a logi build. If you are playing support you should be "Ideally" running with a group of 3 or more Assault/Heavy's......making repairs, resupply, revive etc.... the SMG works great in that scenario because it does have enough usability to assist in kills and/or finish off an opponent that got the better of your squad allowing you to revive and repair.
Just my thoughts...... The SMG wasn't intended to win a one on one shoot out.....it was intended to fill in the gaps of fire in your squad. Its meant for suppression rather than killing! Keep the enemy occupied while your squad mates reload..etc . I think once the beta is over with and the corps really start showing their teeth the smg will have its purpose in a squad!
|
Azmode Deamus
Amarr Templars
Amarr Empire
28
|
Posted - 2012.10.09 23:03:00 -
[15] - Quote
The SMG SHOULD be an up close personal side arm. Just like the Pistol is...
Now wether or not sidearms are too weak is not a question I can answer as of now...
Pistols though last build were a lot harder to use, and IMO not as effective as SMGs. Although I used Pistols more, because of hit detection issues with SMGs. I could unload a whole clip into someones back and do nothing... I had the same problem with ARs as well. So I switched to pistols and started dropping foes if I timed the shots right.
Pistols just need to have a instant shots. Its hard enough to hit someone moving as is - you shouldnt have to lead targets to hit them with 'em. |
Cross Atu
Conspiratus Immortalis
775
|
Posted - 2012.10.10 02:39:00 -
[16] - Quote
Alshadow wrote:Necrodermis wrote:they already tried giving SMGs actual damage. problem is it made them way more effective than a AR.
you also have to think about it this way. you are shooting another armored person. the little power the SMG takes isn't going to do a whole lot. no one is asking for more damage, just more flexibility, we want to be able to actually hurt ppl with the smg from more than 15ft away, i honestly think that if the logi class starts with smg skills then the smg should be able to be an independant gun that is useable by more than just scouts
This needs to be addressed in some fashion, as a starting skill build shouldn't be inherently inferior to any other.
In addition Logi suits only have one weapon slot so since it's the Logi in question the SMG cannot be considered a secondary weapon within the context of the Artificer/Logi |
sendeth
KILL-EM-QUICK
RISE of LEGION
45
|
Posted - 2012.10.10 05:20:00 -
[17] - Quote
you people complaining about the smg are freakin crazy. ok, maybe a couple things could be made a little better (and the sights sucks, totally useless) but most of the issues are cleared up with skills. max all the smg and support skills out and you will be mowing people down. as in people, plural. the ar needs more kick and it will be fixed. the smg could be buffed a little but i wouldn't drop the clip size on a weapon that fires at around 1000 rps. put a small scope or a laser sight on it. maybe a big peace sign or smiley face sticker on the side. now that would make it lethal. |
Jack McReady
A.C.M.E Corp
71
|
Posted - 2012.10.10 08:55:00 -
[18] - Quote
Necrodermis wrote:they already tried giving SMGs actual damage. problem is it made them way more effective than a AR.
you also have to think about it this way. you are shooting another armored person. the little power the SMG takes isn't going to do a whole lot.
how did it made smg better than AR? you are confusing some things, the problem back in the last builds was different, scout suits could easily close the range gap due to speed and hit detection issues and unload bullets into your head, this is not possible any more.
additionally back in the last builds you had to get quite alot of SP in SMGs to trump AR damage and SMGs were almost fine that way, they trumped AR close range (and not by a large margin, the damage was only slightly higher) but at mid to long range SMGs were useless due to accuracy and effective range. I remember the SMGs in the last builds very well, cause I used them alot as on some fits to save grid and cpu, you could not kill anyone outside 30 meters with it. |
sendeth
KILL-EM-QUICK
RISE of LEGION
45
|
Posted - 2012.10.10 16:17:00 -
[19] - Quote
Jack McReady wrote:Necrodermis wrote:they already tried giving SMGs actual damage. problem is it made them way more effective than a AR.
you also have to think about it this way. you are shooting another armored person. the little power the SMG takes isn't going to do a whole lot. how did it made smg better than AR? you are confusing some things, the problem back in the last builds was different, scout suits could easily close the range gap due to speed and hit detection issues and unload bullets into your head, this is not possible any more. additionally back in the last builds you had to get quite alot of SP in SMGs to trump AR damage and SMGs were almost fine that way, they trumped AR close range (and not by a large margin, the damage was only slightly higher) but at mid to long range SMGs were useless due to accuracy and effective range. I remember the SMGs in the last builds very well, cause I used them alot as on some fits to save grid and cpu, you could not kill anyone outside 30 meters with it.
how far out do you want to kill someone? it's an smg. just like the shotgun, it is a matter of play style. you don't engage someone unless you can win. you make sure to be quick, close the gap and attack as hard as possible then gtfo long enough for shields and armor to go back up and strike again. if you want to take a shot at everything that moves, get an ar. smg's and shottys are for people that plan out their attacks or spend a lot of time at a full sprint. i agree that they range of the smg needs increased slightly, but it is mostly good as it is once you get some sp's dumped in. the only reason i say the range needs increased is because of the smg vs shotgun. when being attacked by a shotgun, you have a very narrow margin between so close you get blasted and too far to do any damage. |
KEROSIINI-TERO
Seraphim Initiative.
CRONOS.
248
|
Posted - 2012.10.10 16:32:00 -
[20] - Quote
SMG is still quite powerful, and especially powerful considering it's a sidearm.
Sure, the range is crap as beyond 10-15m it only tickles randomly.
Sight should be fixed.
If anything, a small increment in effective range or slightly tighter shot radius would be ok.
If something should be tuned down, it would be exactly the clip size.
TL;DR: SMG should not be first weapon to be tuned among the others. |
|
|
Alshadow
Amarr Templars
Amarr Empire
71
|
Posted - 2012.10.10 16:56:00 -
[21] - Quote
sendeth wrote:Jack McReady wrote:Necrodermis wrote:they already tried giving SMGs actual damage. problem is it made them way more effective than a AR.
you also have to think about it this way. you are shooting another armored person. the little power the SMG takes isn't going to do a whole lot. how did it made smg better than AR? you are confusing some things, the problem back in the last builds was different, scout suits could easily close the range gap due to speed and hit detection issues and unload bullets into your head, this is not possible any more. additionally back in the last builds you had to get quite alot of SP in SMGs to trump AR damage and SMGs were almost fine that way, they trumped AR close range (and not by a large margin, the damage was only slightly higher) but at mid to long range SMGs were useless due to accuracy and effective range. I remember the SMGs in the last builds very well, cause I used them alot as on some fits to save grid and cpu, you could not kill anyone outside 30 meters with it. how far out do you want to kill someone? it's an smg. just like the shotgun, it is a matter of play style. you don't engage someone unless you can win. you make sure to be quick, close the gap and attack as hard as possible then gtfo long enough for shields and armor to go back up and strike again. if you want to take a shot at everything that moves, get an ar. smg's and shottys are for people that plan out their attacks or spend a lot of time at a full sprint. i agree that they range of the smg needs increased slightly, but it is mostly good as it is once you get some sp's dumped in. the only reason i say the range needs increased is because of the smg vs shotgun. when being attacked by a shotgun, you have a very narrow margin between so close you get blasted and too far to do any damage.
if the artificer/logi guy starts with smgs than i want to be a logi and effectively use SMGs, as logi i dont wanna be runnning around dumb fast with mass skills put into my smg, i want my skills to go else where, i dont want a killing machinegun i just want a gun ican support with from range, and maybe defend myself up close, the SMG is prety much just for CQB and since i can only have one weapon, using an SMG really hurts me |
Jack McReady
A.C.M.E Corp
71
|
Posted - 2012.10.10 17:14:00 -
[22] - Quote
sendeth wrote:Jack McReady wrote:Necrodermis wrote:they already tried giving SMGs actual damage. problem is it made them way more effective than a AR.
you also have to think about it this way. you are shooting another armored person. the little power the SMG takes isn't going to do a whole lot. how did it made smg better than AR? you are confusing some things, the problem back in the last builds was different, scout suits could easily close the range gap due to speed and hit detection issues and unload bullets into your head, this is not possible any more. additionally back in the last builds you had to get quite alot of SP in SMGs to trump AR damage and SMGs were almost fine that way, they trumped AR close range (and not by a large margin, the damage was only slightly higher) but at mid to long range SMGs were useless due to accuracy and effective range. I remember the SMGs in the last builds very well, cause I used them alot as on some fits to save grid and cpu, you could not kill anyone outside 30 meters with it. how far out do you want to kill someone? it's an smg. just like the shotgun, it is a matter of play style. you don't engage someone unless you can win. you make sure to be quick, close the gap and attack as hard as possible then gtfo long enough for shields and armor to go back up and strike again. if you want to take a shot at everything that moves, get an ar. smg's and shottys are for people that plan out their attacks or spend a lot of time at a full sprint. i agree that they range of the smg needs increased slightly, but it is mostly good as it is once you get some sp's dumped in. the only reason i say the range needs increased is because of the smg vs shotgun. when being attacked by a shotgun, you have a very narrow margin between so close you get blasted and too far to do any damage.
you dont get the point, the AR should be jack of all trades, not master of all ranges except shotgun range. AR should not trump SMGs in their favored range, never. not from balance point of view, nor from realism. AR had plenty of advantages over SMG, now SMG is inferior even at close range too. being a sidearm is not an argument, especially since one profession is obviously supposed to use it as main weapon. |
J'Jor Da'Wg
KILL-EM-QUICK
RISE of LEGION
648
|
Posted - 2012.10.10 17:17:00 -
[23] - Quote
I think those changes would be a favorable alternative to super nerfing the AR. |
Whispercrow
Seituoda Taskforce Command
Caldari State
102
|
Posted - 2012.10.11 00:11:00 -
[24] - Quote
I know AR-lovers might get upset, but...
Reality doesn't matter here, as A) There are hundreds of variations of AR's and SMG's in the real world -and- B) This isn't the real world.
Having said that, game balance and the intended purpose for the weapons is what matters. The problem is that we don't know what the Devs are thinking... and they aren't talking about it!
If the Devs intend the SMG to be a 'crappy backup offspring of an AR that you only use because you have no other options', then they're doing it perfectly and there don't need to be any changes.
I, however, would like to believe that there is a sort of intended game-balance thinking that goes like this:
There are different 'families' of weapons and they can be seperated according to their effects and purpose.
There is the 'single-shot direct-burst-damage' family. It goes something along the lines of: Shotgun-->Pistol-->Sniper Rifle. There are some variations here as certain other halfbreed offspring make their way in (the single-shot AR that can be 'hacked' to fire super fast), but on the whole, its 'family motto' seems to be "I tear big chunks off you but require care to aim if you intend to deal any damage at all". It's unusual in that the two 'extreme' range ends (close and far) do more damage per hit, but require much greater reload time (and in the Sniper's cast, waiting for the aim to re-center).
Then there is the 'rapid-fire direct-continuous-damage' family. In theory, it should go something along the lines of: SMG-->AR-->HMG. The lethality should go in that order (SMG deadliest over time) but is restricted by range. At least, if this were in any way 'realistic'. But, of course, it's not, as the AR is more accurate at range. The 'family motto' seems to be "You will have about 2-3 seconds tops before all your health is gone if I'm aimed at you the whole time, but otherwise give you the chance to do some damage as I spray around you".
The first family is fairly easy to balance, because all the weapons are of the same class (Light) and usable by all suits.
The second family is more difficult to balance, because it goes along the lines of Sidearm-->Primary (Light)-->Heavy. Thus, not usable by all suits. And everyone will argue.
I, personally, would like to have a reason to equip both an AR and an SMG, aside from the crazy reasoning of "I'll put a Toxin in the Sidearm just in case I somehow survive long enough to run out of AR rounds and need a substitute." I'd prefer it to be "I have all my bases covered, and unless I meet a shotgun guy at point blank or a sniper at extreme, I should have it covered."
More importantly, I'd like to have a reason to spend points on SMG skills other than "Welp, I'm almost done maxing AR's!" |
WARSLAVEs
Villore Sec Ops
Gallente Federation
15
|
Posted - 2012.10.11 04:53:00 -
[25] - Quote
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 |
Bosse Grahn
90
|
Posted - 2012.10.15 13:20:00 -
[26] - 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. ^^ |
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |