Why WOULD you NERF the ARs they DONT require ONE.

if anything i think the AR could use more max range

Why WOULD you NERF the ARs they DONT require ONE.

Bad post.

Assault rifles are for close to mid range combat. The way they are designed and what they do in this game shows it well, they do what it says. Im not seeing an issue.

The only weapons with issues are the submachine gun and HMG. Submachine guns personify close range dominance in present day, they have stopping power most ARs can only dream of attaining. For the sake of balance though they were changed to the lower spectrum of damage. Sad but whatever, not even the fire rate of smgs conpensate for the poor lack of power. They made it a side arm though so whatever. I guess its fine.

HMGs however are another story. They have high capacity, moderate damage, and despite what everyone else says, decent range. God mode on foot essentially, the only thing that hampers them is the slow movement speed of the player. Then those players have 1k+ armor/shields. Too much for a single individual. Its ok though, it takes them forever to get to objectives, Until they hop into an LAV and hop out and spray. Nerfs needed.

Mass drivers, have fail written all over them.

Forge guns need slower traveling projectiles, much like rpgs and AT rockets. Not insta hitish.

Swarm launchers need faster movement and to not go left as soon as theyre launched.

Shotguns, are for people that are uncomfortable with aiming.

Snipers are fine. Cowards.

Laser rifles are ok.

Pistols are fine.

Railgun turrets need faster tracking, they are horridly inefficient with how slow target aquisition is.

Blasters need to do reduced damage to tanks not to everything, just tanks. If you put a blaster on you should mow down infantry but it should take alot more effort to destroy a tank. Just as a bradleys auto cannon tickles a T-90 but the t-90s 125mm smooth bore cannon will tear a hole in the side of the bradley. Its called balance, if you throw realism in the mix it helps sometimes as well.

Blasters are fine
Rails are fine

Have you ever seriously used any small hybrid turrets before? I have plenty of practice, and I use prototype small blasters/rails.
A stabilized prototype blaster is ok against infantry (still not as good as it should be), while a normal prototype small railgun still takes about 6 shots to take down a starter fit baloch (gallente LAV).

If SMG and AR hip accuracy swapped balance would be fine between them. As it stands now SMG fires all over and AR is easily controllable.

Nothing requires a nerf. But unbalanced games aren't fun to play.

The only people who want a weapon nerfed are people who can't use the weapon and the only people who don't want it nerfed can only use that weapon.

ALSO you AREN'T cool IF you TYPE like THIS.

If SMG and AR hip accuracy swapped balance would be fine between them. As it stands now SMG fires all over and AR is easily controllable.

HMGs are fine
Blasters are fine
Rails are fine

agree with smgs and i dont like ppls counter argument how its a sidearm....the scrambler pistol is a sidearm and can drop ppl alot faster than most guns if the person knows how to use it

The problem isn't that they dominate their specialty, it's that they dominate where they aren't supposed to dominate.

Better at mid-long range than laser rifles.
Better at short range than SMGs

ARs need recoil, which CCp said they're working on already.

They don't need a nerf. Other guns don't need a buff. ARs just need to be tweaked slightly to make them work as ARs instead of lasers with equal damage to armour and shields.

START TRANSMISSION............................


KOOL, but i feel the SMG needs to be a lil stronger. Maybe 23-25 hp per hit. Right now the toxin is at 20hp. Im going to look at all the numbers for the SMG and update after i study them.


END TRANSMISSION...................................

The AR is KING of Mid range !!!!!