DUST Search - [Feedback] SMGs need a buff tbqh

Mavado V Noriega wrote:

Garrett Blacknova wrote:

I can outgun most ARs - including some Prototypes - with the Toxin SMG from the Merc Pack. It has Standard-level stats, and if you're using it in close, it rips targets to pieces faster than most ARs.

They're a short-range weapon, and more importantly, they're a SIDEARM. They're designed to be SECONDARY weapons, not PRIMARY. If you're trying to use the SMG as your main gun, you need one of 3 things:

1. Lots of SP investment.
2. Lots of skill and situational awareness.
3. A good reason why you're only carrying a Sidearm.

if ur gonna have swarm launchers as a primary weapon then u NEED a good 2ndary weapon that can at least hold its own against infantry in its ideal situation

sorry but SMG users dont even kill me even when they get the jump on me and i feel i should of died
its also one of the reasons ppl neglect AV because their is no decent sidearm except the scrambler pistol and most ppl arent good enough to use it + hit detection issues still

ya its a sidearm but a terrible one in my books when the scrambler pistol has alot more range and stoppin power than it why even choose an SMG?


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Garrett Blacknova Codex Troopers 1849	Posted - 2012.11.27 12:02:00 - [1] - Quote I can outgun most ARs - including some Prototypes - with the Toxin SMG from the Merc Pack. It has Standard-level stats, and if you're using it in close, it rips targets to pieces faster than most ARs. They're a short-range weapon, and more importantly, they're a SIDEARM. They're designed to be SECONDARY weapons, not PRIMARY. If you're trying to use the SMG as your main gun, you need one of 3 things: 1. Lots of SP investment. 2. Lots of skill and situational awareness. 3. A good reason why you're only carrying a Sidearm.
Garrett Blacknova Codex Troopers 1849	Posted - 2012.11.27 12:30:00 - [2] - Quote Mavado V Noriega wrote: Garrett Blacknova wrote: I can outgun most ARs - including some Prototypes - with the Toxin SMG from the Merc Pack. It has Standard-level stats, and if you're using it in close, it rips targets to pieces faster than most ARs. They're a short-range weapon, and more importantly, they're a SIDEARM. They're designed to be SECONDARY weapons, not PRIMARY. If you're trying to use the SMG as your main gun, you need one of 3 things: 1. Lots of SP investment. 2. Lots of skill and situational awareness. 3. A good reason why you're only carrying a Sidearm. if ur gonna have swarm launchers as a primary weapon then u NEED a good 2ndary weapon that can at least hold its own against infantry in its ideal situation sorry but SMG users dont even kill me even when they get the jump on me and i feel i should of died its also one of the reasons ppl neglect AV because their is no decent sidearm except the scrambler pistol and most ppl arent good enough to use it + hit detection issues still ya its a sidearm but a terrible one in my books when the scrambler pistol has alot more range and stoppin power than it why even choose an SMG? Honestly, I suck with Pistols. I'm not a good sniper either. Precision weapons in general disagree with me. I don't line up my shots accurately enough for them to be practical. SMGs work great. I see MANY more ARs than Shotguns on the battlefield when I'm running one of my SMG fittings, and I die more often to Shotguns when I'm using my SMG. If I get the drop on a Shotgun guy, and don't keep my distance properly, he's going to turn and one-shot me. If I get the drop on a guy with any non-officer AR in the game, I give myself about 80% odds of winning that fight using a Toxing SMG. I've gone against Heavies with HMGs and torn them apart with my Toxin though, so YMMV. Want a good reason to bring the SMG instead of the Pistol? ERRATIC TARGETS. People who don't move predictably. You technically CAN headshot them, but it's not practical to do so deliberately. Aim in the general direction of the upper torso and burst-fire with your SMG, though... that's a good way to get a few headshots and have even your bodyshots putting out a decent amount of damage. I've had times where another player with an AR got the drop on me and I managed to evade, turn, and kill them with my SMG. It's also a great backup weapon for a Shotgun - if you're sticking to CQC-friendly areas of the map, but your enemy's forcing you into a range where your main weapon is ineffective, pull the SMG and unload on the guy who things he's "safe" because your Shotgun can't hit hard enough.
Garrett Blacknova Codex Troopers 1849	Posted - 2012.11.27 12:40:00 - [3] - Quote Mavado V Noriega wrote: lol i know how to shoot im sayin the hip fire on an AR is better than an SMG thats dumb SMGs in every game always have lower damage and better hip fire than ARs yet there is no reason to bother with an SMG for cqc if i got my AR since i can hip fire better with that due to game mechanics anyway an no matter how u look at it the range is still balls it has like 1/4 the range of an AR....really? sharpshooter skills are wasted on smgs since the optimal is like 15m ur practically gettin no bonus and wasting alot of SP So because you, personally perform better with AR hip-fire, that makes them objectively better when several others find the SMG more reliable in close quarters? ok. You keep thinking that.
Garrett Blacknova Codex Troopers 1849	Posted - 2012.11.27 13:18:00 - [4] - Quote Mavado V Noriega wrote: @ Garrett i can squeeze the AR at full auto and have better hip fire than an SMG at full auto pull out both weapons, go stand near a wall an squeeze and watch how big ur cone gets In CQC, a slightly WIDER cone is actually more beneficial than the tight grouping with the AR though. At worst, it's not as bad a liability as it would be at range, and in many situations, it makes constant damage a lot easier to maintain against a fast-moving target. That reduced accuracy, which hurts the SMG in mid-range and beyond, is part of why it's so good in close combat.
Garrett Blacknova Codex Troopers 1849	Posted - 2012.11.27 14:21:00 - [5] - Quote Sentient Archon wrote: Garrett Blacknova wrote: In CQC, a slightly WIDER cone is actually more beneficial than the tight grouping with the AR though. Huh? Seen a lot of combat for your expert opinion? SMGs are supposed to be center mass. Ever fired an uzi or mp5? They are dead accurate at 30 feet in burst mode or FA mode. However the accuracy does reduce over time in FA mode and thats because no one can handle the recoil for that long. Your hands start shaking. CQC = Center Mass OK... I'll rephrase. WHEN PLAYING VIDEOGAMES, a wider cone of fire is better - to a certain point - for CQC. It's part of why Shotguns are great in close quarters in games as well. Having a wider spread means you can more easily hit multiple closely-groupd targets, or have an easier time hitting one target, than if you have precision accuracy. If your weapon fires exactly where you're aiming, you have to be more careful to get ANY damage on target, and with a fast-moving evasive enemy, that means you're going to miss more often. With a wider spread, you can afford to be less precise with your aim and still get some of your shots hitting the target. You don't have to anticipate every single movement of an erratic target that doesn't want to be killed like you do with the more accurate weapons.
Garrett Blacknova Codex Troopers 1849	Posted - 2012.11.27 15:17:00 - [6] - Quote Mavado V Noriega wrote: LOL define cqc? when ur literally kissin the dude? sorry might as well have nova knives at that point wider cone of fire better in cqc? ok lets reward luck and spray and pray over skill.....seems like the way dust is goin less and less skill based in EVERY FPS SMGs are the run an gun hip fire low damage weapon. Please explain why at FULL AUTO my AR has a tighter spread than my SMG at full auto PLEASE explain that my FULL AUTO AR has the same spread as my SMG that im burst firing in this game? show me a game where an AR hip fires better than an SMG. the downfall of smgs in other games has always been less range and lower damage but makes up for it in faster rof and tighter hip fire spread ppls arguments of SMGs being sidearms so they gotta be crap compared to primary is rubbish considering the scrambler pistol is better than most primary weapons by that logic scrambler pistols should get a severe nerf to range and damage In most games I've played, SMGs have MUCH worse ADS spread than ARs, and also have at least slightly worse hip-fire spread than ARs, but the difference between the two is less severe. Yes, AR hip-fire is too accurate, but that's not a problem with SMGs.
Garrett Blacknova Codex Troopers 1849	Posted - 2012.11.27 17:10:00 - [7] - Quote Sentient Archon wrote: Garrett Blacknova wrote: WHEN PLAYING VIDEOGAMES, a wider cone of fire is better - to a certain point - for CQC. Huh? Lolwut? If you are trying to take down an elephant or dinosaur maybe. In which world is a wider cone better for CQC? You dont try to use an elephant gun to shoot a bunny. Thats ridiculous! CQC in anything is center mass. You can aim for centre mass on a target with a Sniper Rifle from across the map. That doesn't make it CQC. CQC is Close Quarters Combat. Actually what the abbreviation means, not a generic term for an aim point. When you're fighting against anything except a Heavy in close quarters, a competent player WILL be moving erratically and trying to make themselves as difficult a target as they can. Having a weapon that covers an AREA with damage instead of the precise location you're aiming becomes an advantage when you can't magically tell exactly where the target is while they're not moving consistently. Basically, the spread on Shotguns and SMGs does two things for you that ARs can't match: 1. Lag compensation. When hit detection sometimes goes screwy, a weapon with a good spread helps ensure the hit detection problems give you hits you didn't deserve as well as misses that should have been hits. 2. Reduces the value of evasive action. If your opponent moves in an unexpected direction suddenly, you're going to be off-target for a moment. When some of your firepower is spreading wide from your point of aim, this means the target has to move further out of your crosshairs before their truly safe from harm. When the game uses regenerating shields with a delay, this means that failing to clear your firing arc lets you keep pressure on more effectively even if you're not landing many hits on the target. At longer ranges, these advantages turn to disadvantages, but when you're in CQC (as defined by its actual meaning, not just "centre mass" which on its own means absolutely nothing), you're better off with at least some measure of spread on your weapon.
Garrett Blacknova Codex Troopers 1849	Posted - 2012.11.27 17:47:00 - [8] - Quote Sentient Archon wrote: "Centre Mass" is a term used in gravity not in weapons combat. "Center Mass" is the appropriate term to be used in weapon combat. It is also called as grouping. It is the largest distance between 2 bullets that have been fired. I would rather have my center mass smaller than larger. This means I am firing more bullets within the same circle and thats how SMGs are and should be in CQC situations. I want my bullets to the maximum damage it can in the shortest possible time and thats why SMGs are popular for that. Creating a spread looses this feature and hence the purpose. If I am shooting someone in the face, I want my Center Mass to be that persons face and not anything else in CQC and hence I dont need cones or spreads. It ya need tips on how to use a gun is RL I can give you some. My grouping is 3 cms at 100 ft with 10 rounds using an AR15 That's nice. I'm a published game reviewer. If you need advice on understanding how videogame weapons work, try reading the post immediately above yours for an explanation of why CQC in gaming isn't the same as CQC in the real world. By the way, "centre mass" is a shorthand phrase used in combat to refer to the easiest point of aim - literally, the centre of the target's mass. On a human body, this is the middle of the torso, and is a "safe" place to aim for when an inexperienced shooter wants to be relatively sure of actually hitting the target. THAT was the "centre mass" I thought you meant, which is sometimes written "center mass" by Americans, many of whom are also oblivious to the differences between "metre" and "meter" and insist the first spelling doesn't exist.
Garrett Blacknova Codex Troopers 1849	Posted - 2012.11.27 18:05:00 - [9] - Quote Sentient Archon wrote: Garrett Blacknova wrote: That's nice. I'm a published game reviewer. If you need advice on understanding how videogame weapons work, try reading the post immediately above yours for an explanation of why CQC in gaming isn't the same as CQC in the real world. Awh cool dude! I am a published photographer and a combat vet. I have also spent the past 20 years of my life gaming to know that game reviewers know jack about what they write and most of the time are biased. And as far as understanding how gaming weapons work, DILLIGAF? If I wanted to understand how gaming weapons work I would be a gaming dev not a gamer. I am pointing out how a sub mach should work vs how someone thinks it should work. Realism doesn't always translate into functionality in a game. If it did, then we wouldn't be asking for balance when reality is rarely balanced fairly. Try ACTUALLY reading that earlier post I was directing you to before arguing that guns should work in an online multiplayer game exactly the same way they do in the real-world even if an attempt at doing so would ruin any attempt at making the game worth playing. Sentient Archon wrote: Garrett Blacknova wrote: By the way, "centre mass" is a shorthand phrase used in combat to refer to the easiest point of aim - literally, the centre of the target's mass. On a human body, this is the middle of the torso, and is a "safe" place to aim for when an inexperienced shooter wants to be relatively sure of actually hitting the target. Wiki much? Nope. Last time I was on a Wiki for something other than EVE was sometime last month, I think. Your point?