they were always beatable, Marton's laser rifles killed the crap out of me, Blondie's HMG wrecked me, Sleepy's snipers gave me a hard time. people just need to practice more

1). CCP in early blogs even said heavies can be taken on 1v1 (by scounts in cqb; and AR's at range); so yeah, your whole belief is negated. And as others said, if heavies should win 1v1, then we'd all run heavy suits.

If you look at the iron sight there are three dots on the sights that are lined up. When you fire your AR the bullets are actually going to where that dot is pointing. THis mean to shoot someones head with the AR you have to actually put this dot over the head of the target but in doing this you completely cover the enemy with your sight.

I Can take out a heavy 1v1.
Random AR scrubs shouldn't always beat heavies.
Why would anyone play as a heavy if anything can beat them no problem?

not sure where to start with the fail of this post ..

1). CCP in early blogs even said heavies can be taken on 1v1 (by scounts in cqb; and AR's at range); so yeah, your whole belief is negated. And as others said, if heavies should win 1v1, then we'd all run heavy suits.

2). AR's weren't perfect at everything ;but yet an AR in games and real world is a jack of all trades weapon. However if you wanted range on your AR, you needed up to upgrade your SS skill (which most good players do); that or run with a TAR. If liked to be sneaky, you had shotties; or if wanted to cause havoc you have MD's.

3). MD dont really need a bigger clip; i just used them for the first two times. Combined went 23-2; so yeah, im pretty sure people can survive on using a 6 round grenade launcher that inhibits your enemy from aiming; as if clip runs out; its called secondary.


With the new patch, we are all adapting and still doing just as well as before; it is just tedious in the sense, that the main gun used by a good portion of the community got altered in more then one way. It would of been easier and possibly better to do one thing at a time instead of several; as most other weapons when altered had one thing changed about them at a time (in a negative fashion).

As other AR's users might say, recoil is perfectly fine; its the loss the the "scope" that had changed gameplay (and not for the better). That and i'd say all around those who have skilled deep into weapons may be against the scaling of damage; as there isn't a big point to run better weapons anymore based on damage. The only real point to skill into some weapons are for the passive bonuses said skilling gives you

That's not how iron sights work- at least not this kind.
When both parts of the sight are lined up correctly, the part where the bullets will go is slightly above the "dot", not in the middle of it.
At least that's how it's supposed to work.

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.

I'm looking forward to OPTIONAL scopes, when they introduce (hopefully later this build rather than waiting for the next) weapon customisation.

I don't even use ARs, and I'm looking forward to the renewal of tears about them when it hits.

I think Assault Rifles should be repossessed. They cause a lot of murder. Derp derp. I heard the president say it!

I think Assault Rifles should be repossessed. They cause a lot of murder. Derp derp. I heard the president say it!

This really is a stupid post in poor taste.

"optional scopes" and "weapon customization" don't work for games that already have so many variables that alter weapon performance.

CCP should keep things simple and offer the camera sights we already have along with ironsights.

This game already offers enough customization we don't need more. Rather than adding customization CCP should focus on increasing the player count.

naw, the president said only criminals should be able to obtain guns

Obeezy said that? Man that's not cool of him. Immma redact my vote!

TV never lies man. Obama isn't even black - he paints himself everyday.

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.

A lot smaller ? Or with a better design ?
Cause if you dare compare new magnus peak to a COD map, then you'd better stop right here. Those three objectives have 150-200m distance between each other.

Ashland ? It's action packed. short range infantry oriented (ABC) while still having room for long range weapon. It's still bigger than a COD map.

Plateus ? Kind of the middle ground map.

Any COD map from MW2 (last i dare play) is still way smaller than any of those. And with a lot more of camping positions...
Beside what you're saying makes no sense. According to you : If we, poor fools, dont notice the AR nerf it's because maps were shrunk. Then, how comes you get mow down by lasers and MD ? If the map are so much COD like ?

Honestly, i still take down most infantry at 40-50 meters without problem. And short range MD tend to taste my shotgun when they annoy me....

Mass driver isn't really good at long range, isn't it?

I love how you guys don't complain as CCP balances everything else, but the second they take a look at your precious weapon (which lets face it, is all you guys ever use), you're all up in arms and telling us all how terrible the change was.

What is it you tell us noobs?

Get good?

Get good.

if you know how to aim a mass driver you can be a beast trust me it feels awesome going 23-1 with a mass driver because i can hit and kill people at 100+m and also kill anyone who comes into 1-100m of me. but i still dont think that is how its supposed to be

Okay Slick I would like to actually compare the situation change as far as combat and weapons go and put in my suggestions. Not trolling ignore the fools and lets talk logic here.

The skirmish maps have not shrunk(cannot speak for the ambush don't play it often). They have also added much more objects by adding instillation in new places to force corners and cover. By doing this they have played to both sides. You now are generally closer to the MD user than before so it is a lot more dangerous than before. They have also helped out the AR user by applying the cover everywhere and allowing for new elevation points for tactical advantage. The disadvantage is now people have to use cover wisely to hide for a MD.

Next I want to compare damage from AR tier to AR tier, then AR to MD. The difference in the AR tier to tier is in the DPS over time not shot to shot. Yes people say oh it deals 341 a second. Yes this is true, but like you stated you miss with a good bit of them due to kick movement a being hit yourself. So lets say you land 5 to 6 out of 10 shots, 170 damage per second on the lowest tier rifle with no mods and without weaponry buff. Go up a tier 7 out of 10 shots you are now doing due to kick reduction. The DPS is now increased to 224 damage in one second, that is almost a complex shield mod difference there. this is all without weaponry and damage mods.

Next lets do MD to AR. Yes there is a MD that can do 378 damage in one shot, but this is the breach variant. It fires slower and the radius is reduced severely and so is the splash damage. Lets just compare the standards to start no point in getting to many numbers in there. The standard compare at MD 225 a sec on a direct hit, the AR at the chances and hit probability I gave you earlier is 170 a sec. This is with a direct hit. Now switch to splash and the numbers go to MD 115 to AR 170 still. On the prototype end, you have the MD doing 270 on a direct hit and 138 on splash. With the AR doing again with they chances and hit probability from earlier 224 a sec. Throw in the MD weakness to shields and their ability to do damage to multiple tangos at once. Then in CQC with less cover they are better. Put distance like say Bravo to Charlie on the four point and It is the AR all day. This is written up as a 1v1 and with no damage buffs from anywhere.

So really it seems they both have an advantage in different areas of the field. The main issue we have is now with the new IS on the AR most feel like they have to be with in 15M to kill someone. Practice some get a little bit away and you will see how good the AR is still. Yes the MD is more deadly now because you are closer to it. Yes the AR IS is different but plays better into the CQC that they have forced on us than it did with a scope. TAR needs a damage buff a major damage buff by like around 200%. So it hurts real nice like on the business end, but doesn't really allow it to play CQC well. So it is more of a suppressor weapon as opposed to a breach weapon since we already have that. The AR gets put the dot on them and pull the trigger advantage here I am sorry it takes more skill to get a good hit with the MD than it does with the AR. The issue I see is the radius on the MD at operation lv 5 is 6m with a freedom that cover a big area. So maybe a small nerf on that would be good, and I mean small not chop 2m off each one so it is a precision gun that takes time to get there and the bullet can be easily dodged. The AR no idea for making it better in CQC i kinda like it the way it is now really never really like to scope to begin with(sorry always used IS even in battlefield at long ranges still IS it).

What do you think. I think skill is the biggest factor and numbers of course we all know what zerg swarming can do.

Edit* sorry forgot this earlier. When the maps get bigger they are going to be so big people are going to be begging for a dropship to come and pick them up so they don't have to truck it(by foot or actual truck LOL). So range will not be a factor from hot spot to hot spot. Atleast this is the way I am seeing it in the future.

G-slick you're such a beast on the field - I fear very little besides you and 2 others. Never seem to be able to kill you guys. But I think I see a problem with your thinking. CCP is a company - and your a hardcore gamer. The idea of the balance wasn't just fixing game mechanics - but a lot of what CCP is doing is developing a game that will last - thus their also trying to be attractive to gamers. And what's commonly known as unattractive to the FPS crowd is a single weapon that can do all in high end games. That was the AR - the do all weapon. Not do all because it can do everything well enough like an AR should - it did everything the best. That needed fixing pretty badly if CCP wants to advertise how depth there creative system is. A person shouldn't need to dedicate too much time learning a weapon that's only point and fire.

yes but how many times do i need to say this? i understand that the ARs needed recoil but they didnt need to be nerf in 3 different areas at the same time

They only got nerfed in 1 way- recoil. 1 "nerf" was only because people whined they wanted ironsights, no matter how much they suck or how little sense it makes to have them. Not sure what that 3rd nerf you made up is.

G , i agree with you; i think people havent really taken into account the AR was hit on 3 different levels all at once; where no other weapon through any build has been hit as such. Yes classes have been altered along w/ a weapon; but never a sole weapon has been affected in 3 game altering ways at one single time.

The point being, there is a problem with it; yet there wont be a change for several weeks (or at all); and if a change does come, it is hard to tell what is the needed change.

Along with what G said; by nerfing damage (not just to AR's), it has reduced the reasoning to skill up weapons (or least buy the higher tier weapons), as the basic/militia gear really now IS about on par with proto weapons; the only difference is the suits & modules used.