DUST Search - A great build is horrible because of this one thing!!!!

All Channels

General Discussions

A great build is horrible because of this one thing!!!!

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Anyanka Shadowmane Sanmatar Kelkoons Minmatar Republic 80	Posted - 2012.12.20 10:09:00 - [1] - Quote Hi G-SLicK, I see what you are saying, but I'm afraid I disagree about a number of points. I agree that ARs should be one of the central weapons in a game, they should, in my opinion be the best medium range light weapon going, but that's all. I don't think you can say Quote: ARs should be the main weapon of choice with all other weapons branched out with their different roles as you can't say how people should play the game. #1. A Heavy, face to face, 1v1 should take out anyone else. An AR user should have to either out match the heavy in terms of equipment, or (preferably) out play them by using the terrain, their maneuverability and by ganging up on them. #2. I agree, laser rifles have a different niche to ARs, and a good user should be able to take down most things at range. #3. Snipers camping a single point are frustrating, often for both teams. I think a slight change in the map designs so that the crest of the hills is inside the red zone would help. This would better allow sniper hunters to sneak up on them and would hopefully discourage them from sticking in one point for the whole game. Otherwise, I agree that the TacAR should be one of the weapons that is usable to hunt them down. I think that it needs some recoil in place though, two shots in close succession should still hit the target except perhaps at extreme ranges, which shout be enough to drop most snipers if you headshot them, but any more than that should go astray. The TacAR shouldn't be close to matching the rpm of a normal AR no matter how quick your trigger finger is. #4. I've not really seen many mass drivers yet, so can't comment on them. TL:DR? I agree with OP about a couPle of points, but generally think that the new ARs are better that before.
Anyanka Shadowmane Sanmatar Kelkoons Minmatar Republic 80	Posted - 2012.12.20 10:29:00 - [2] - Quote G-SLicK wrote: i thank you for your post, i do agree ARs are not supposed to be OP, BUT they should over nerf things like they hae done, they needed to add recoil and thats it They are slightly over nerfed, true. I think the recoil is a bit much ATM, especially on the TacAR, but I think this build is much closer to balanced than the old one. As much as I liked the old sights, they were far too good. They allowed all ARs to be used at such a massive range that it made the AR massively more versatile than any other weapon. I think that was as important to have included as the recoil. I'd not looked at the damage of ARs before the new build, so I don't know how much of a difference has been made. Generally, yes. I think that changing one thing at a time would be preferable for testing, but it would take much much longer to ensure that everything was fully tested.
Anyanka Shadowmane Sanmatar Kelkoons Minmatar Republic 80	Posted - 2012.12.20 16:59:00 - [3] - Quote semperfi1999 wrote: ...a big post that I wanted to comment on, but didn't want to start my post with a huge quote I agree that the TacAR has been slightly over nerfed and needs either higher damage, lower recoil or a combination of the two, but I think it is much closer to balanced now than it was before the nerf. I initially preferred the standard AR before the nerf, but that is because it was incredibly good at all ranges and much easier to use. After playing with the new iron sighted AR I think that it is a far more balanced weapon. I've not really used the burst or the breach variants yet, so can't really comment, but I think the standard AR is about right. I agree with you about SMGs and Sniper Rifles, I've not tried lasers or mass drivers yet, but lasers seem okay to me ATM, though I think you're right about the mass driver ammo. I don't understand what you mean about an autowin suit? I don't think anyone's said that. As you say, if a heavy can trap you with nowhere to go, they kill you. The only way you beat them is by using your speed and better knowledge of the terrain. This is what people are saying. Face to face, with no cover. A heavy should win. But if you're in a position where you've let a heavy corner you face to face with no cover, you deserve to be ganked!
Anyanka Shadowmane Sanmatar Kelkoons Minmatar Republic 80	Posted - 2012.12.20 19:04:00 - [4] - Quote semperfi1999 wrote: The only problem I have with the regular AR at this time is the lack of an ADS sight that allows users to take advantage of the effective range the AR has....well that and I dont agree with the nerf in dmgs for all standard/adv/proto weapons. What do you see as being the problem with the Iron Sight at long range? I've found that they can obscure my target a little at extreme ranges, but I'm working on getting the hang of it. I think the old sights colour change dot made the AR too good, so I wouldn't want to see that come back. semperfi1999 wrote: Well if that is the case regarding the heavy suits then I guess I dont understand. Mainly because this is a stupid example....it would be like saying tanks should ALWAYS win against an AV user because tanks can kill in 1-2 shots and can absorb way more shots from the AV. The problem is always is not the case on the battlefield.......8 times out of 10 I can take on a heavy 1 v 1 and win. True, but no-one would say 'I can't believe that tank tried to 1v1 me in my LAV, LAV's should always win because their quicker and more manuverable. Tanks need other LAV's to back them up'. I think that heavies should be competitive against assault suits.
Anyanka Shadowmane Sanmatar Kelkoons Minmatar Republic 80	Posted - 2012.12.20 21:44:00 - [5] - Quote xprotoman23 wrote: The loss of a proper sight has completely altered gameplay with an assault rifle. I love how the noobs call things balanced, because the AR's no longer have a proper sight. I guarantee if CCP was to give AR's the camera back noobs would start bitching about the AR again. You're right, removing the camera sight from the standard and the breach AR and removing the colour changing sniper dot from the burst AR has changed the game. Personally, I think for the better. I think the old AR was too good. Not the people who used it, the gun itself. It was, hands down, the best medium range light weapon. It also held it's own very well at both short AND long range. No other weapon can stand up on all three ranges. Some are only useful at one range. Skilled AR users can still use them at range. I mean, even I've managed it on occasion, and I'm by no means the best AR user out there, it's just not handed to you on a plate like it was with the old 'no recoil-sniper spot' build.
Anyanka Shadowmane Sanmatar Kelkoons Minmatar Republic 80	Posted - 2012.12.21 02:23:00 - [6] - Quote Telcontar Dunedain wrote: SoTa PoP wrote: Where's CCP's thoughts on all this and there reasonings - we can say whatever we like and it could be true or supported by biased opinions, it really doesn't matter if CCP had a plan all along for what they've done and we don't understand it. and I had no idea about AR proto nerf. This is the real problem. The Dust CCP devs are really really poor at communicating their goals with changes like these. The AR was properly good at mid, ok at range and ok at CQB. The removal of the camera sight from the AR seems to leave a big hole in the weapons. It may be that there will be attachable scopes but it was premature to remove the camera zoom without those options in game. Wasn't that the problem with the AR though? That it was too easy to be good at all three ranges? It was the best at mid range, as well as being competitive at short and long range. As you say, no other weapon compared to it. Isn't that the definition of unbalanced?
Anyanka Shadowmane Sanmatar Kelkoons Minmatar Republic 80	Posted - 2012.12.21 04:01:00 - [7] - Quote Regis Mk V wrote: The AR was doing what it was supposed to do. The assault rifle became the standard military rifle in the post-World War II era. The Soviet Union led the way with the AK-47, and other nations followed later. Combat experience during the World Wars had shown that most infantry combat took place at 200GÇô300 meters (218GÇô328 yards) distance and that the winner of any given firefight would most likely be the one with the highest rate of fire. The rifle cartridges of the day were therefore unnecessarily powerful, producing recoil and report in exchange for marginal benefit. The lower power of the intermediate cartridge meant that each soldier could fire more bullets faster and/or with less recoil and its lighter weight allowed more ammunition to be carried. Not really, we're not talking about real life, where I imagine the idea is to have a force that is better equipped, better trained and generally better than your opposition so that you complete your objectives with the minimal loss to your own side. We're talking about a game, where the the idea is for weapons to be balanced. If you have one weapon that vastly outperforms all the others, that isn't balanced.
Anyanka Shadowmane Sanmatar Kelkoons Minmatar Republic 80	Posted - 2012.12.21 04:43:00 - [8] - Quote SoTa PoP wrote: Reading around... a lot of the comments are based on G-slick simply being an imperfect speaking out loud. Anyone else find this a tad bit... uncivilized? ^_^ I aim for them as much as the next guy on this forum but the jelly on the imperfects is unfounded. So what they can beat a bunch of beta testers. Beta Testers aren't exactly suppose to be a elite group of players. Bring the ego trips down a bit and take another gander at the AR because as much as I like the changes they still need tweaking. And not a single comment has been said on how to improve what's there besides more scope choices. I want a ton of things for AR. I want to be able to make it a deployable weapon, we're suppose to be in the future, if my gun takes up CPU then it has a computer - so let me see it. I did say I think the TacAR needs slightly less recoil... I think it should be able to get a couple of shots off at extreme range that are close enough together that they'd both be head shots before the recoil drags your gun off target. In fairness, it may well have been lost in amongst the rest of the thread.
Anyanka Shadowmane Sanmatar Kelkoons Minmatar Republic 80	Posted - 2012.12.22 23:22:00 - [9] - Quote Berserker007 wrote: 1). Loss of AR scope: you even said it don't make you better, so there is no harm in having it back. The main reason many want it back is so you can see who you are aiming at, at a distance; as well as knowing if someone is in your effective range (as ever other gun in the game has this feature easily noticeable ingame but the AR now). You (dark cloud), even said this isn't game breaking, thusly shouldn't have needed to be removed as it doesn't alter how the weapon handles, it just allows it to be used as it should, at MEDIUM range with effectiveness It's not just the AR. As far as I remember, only long range weapons like sniper rifles and TacARs have the colour change on their scopes. I know that shotguns and SMGs only have it on their standard, hip-fire mode, when you use their sight mode, it just brings up a sight with a targeting pin or crosshairs, but with no colour change.

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online/DUST514, the EVE/DUST514 logo, EVE/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to OMG Labs to use EVE Online/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, OMG Labs. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.