Cross Atu
Conspiratus Immortalis
775
   |
Posted - 2012.10.16 05:24:00 -
[1] - Quote
Zero Harpuia wrote:I've seen many people whining about the Assault Rifle of late, and not just for one thing or for known broken coding(which is now fixed btw).
It's too accurate!
It's fine the way it is!
It's too weak!
It's too short ranged!
It's too long ranged!
It's kick is screwed!
The sight is unnatural!
I can't paint it pretty colors!
When it comes to ARs, let me make my position absolutely clear. I despise them. I detest them. I loath them. And not just here, but in all shooters. Too much good in everything, not enough bad in something. Too much Jack, not enough ass. Non-specialization sucks, but it's always the strongest way to go in most shooters, and that sickens me.
Now that everyone who wouldn't read the whole OP thinks it's a rage thread and already commented, let's move on.
I will now make a comparison to another team based shooting game. That game is TF2. TF2 has many of the roles we have here in DUST, but one major difference: no Assault Rifle, or even a comparable gun to an Assault Rifle. Each class is cripplingly overspecialized and has it's own weaknesses and strengths which the other classes make up for if used in a squad. And it has also survived for many years, and is touted as an amazingly balanced game.
Now, I'm not saying we should remove ARs entirely, but it would be a nice way to test the balance of everything else if we removed the ARs from the game for a build. We could get things down like the damage build rate for the LRs, the best ranges for the shorter weapons(shotty, SMG), the best way to deal with sniping(how good the scope should be, how much it should kick), if we took the one thing that we know is working fine out of the equation for a few short weeks.
I look forward to the thoughtful comments in the depths of the flame.
Interesting idea, and I like the overall concept behind it. I wonder if there isn't a slightly different iteration that could be perused. I say this due to the effects on balance that have ARs in the game will most certainly have.
An example of this is Sniper range vs SMG/Shotgun.
Right now the AR is actual a more viable choice for mid to close range 'sniping' than the sniper rifle. The only thing that the sniper rifle has going for it when compared with the AR (speaking in very general terms here) is range.
Take the AR out of the game and the sniper rifle likely becomes OP'ed against all the SMG/Shotgun packing players. (It might not if enough players started packing the HMG and LR, but that's hard to say).
I'm fine with the AR (and it's perennial companion the assault suit) being the Jack of all trades but as it currently stands I do feel that there's not an equally fitting master of none factor in place.
AR can be the best general use weapon, but it becomes imbalance if it's also the best specific case weapon anywhere. Specialization should always trump general use within it's specialized area.
My solution, make the AR and Assault suit the baseline against/around which all specialized gear is balanced.
Sniper Rifles should be better at range than the AR.
SMG/Shotguns should be better at close range than the AR.
LR should be better dps over extended fire arcs than the AR.
Mass Drivers should be better at area denial than the AR.
etc.
The flips side of this is that the AR will be better than any other given weapon outside of the specialized battlefield role of that weapon. We'd still see a whole lot of AR on the field (and rightfully so, they'd be the most versatile weapon in the game) but they'd no longer be imbalanced.
A final note here, this idea wouldn't even require an AR nerf, just a balance pass to the stats of other weapons so that they're all brought in line with the AR being the baseline "jack of all trades" weapon (and thus not excelling in any specialty, because versatility is it's specialty. It doesn't need an extra).
0.02 ISK
Cross |