Ok so I don't have the game screen in front of me right now so let's see if I can do this from memory. (Just base stats of the weapon, not counting proficiency and weaponry upgrades or damage mods)

Prototype AR does what, 34 damage per bullet, at roughly 750 rpm, that works out to 750/60=12.5 bullets/sec @ 34 damage each = 34x12.5=425 damage per sec. 34 damage per bullet x 60 in the mag = 2040 per mag. 60 sec / 12.5 bullets per sec = empty mag in 4.8 sec.

Standard HMG does 19 damage per bullet, fires at roughly 2000 rpm, that works out to 2000/60sec = 33.33333333333 (we will say 33.3) bullets/sec @ 19 damage per bullet = 19x33.3= 632.7 damage per sec. 19 damage x 450? in the mag (overheat if constant fire leaves about 120 left) so 330 = 6270 damage per full mag to overheat.

You claim that your suit has an EHP of 1053 and he's dropping you instantly, assuming he lands every shot it requires 1053 EHP / 425 damage per sec = 2.477 sec of sustained fire with 100% accuracy to kill your suit.

The standard HMG does 3.07x more damage per full sustained fire cycle than the prototype AR, and 1.4887x damage over the prototype AR per sec.

Inside each weapons optimal range, you are dead regardless if you can land every shot.
The problem you are having is because of damage mods (which can be applied to both of these types of weapons I have listed)

How does the AR need a nerf?

Rethink your situation and how you got killed, learn from it, learn to counter it instead of just posting yet another stupid "Nerf X because it kills me in Y suit" thread.

TL;DR - READ IT BEFORE YOU MAKE ANOTHER STUPID POST PLEASE.
Also, if there are any errors in actual game values of just the weapons before enhancements (skills or mods) keep in mind this is just from memory and not having any in game into in front of me.

The assault rifle is the "jack of all trades", which means it functions well in almost all scenarios. Which is also the reason an assault rifle is the "standard" soldier weapon.

More specialised weapons are meant for more specialised tasks. Which means that when they go up against an AR outside of their comfort zone, they should be at a disadvantage.

There is only an issue when an AR actually beats (or equals) a specialised weapon in that weapons role. So, for instance, if you could snipe more efficiently with an AR than a Sniper rifle. Or mow down a cluster of reddots at short to medium range quicker than an HMG.Or destroy a tank faster than a Forge Gun. Etcetera, etcetera.

Now, I'm not saying that that is not the case (though I think it isn't all that bad overall, but there might be some specialised roles that an AR is slightly to good at). But simply saying AR's need to be nerfed in general is way to simplified. If anything, (some of) the specialised weapons need to be buffed in their respective role.

I don't disagree with you, in essence. As I said, the AR might well be a bit too good at some specific roles (or, the specialised weapon isn't good enough).

I don't know if it's quite as bad as you imply though...

When it comes to range, an AR has nothing on a Sniper Rifle. Sure, the effective range of the AR isn't small, so you can use it quite well to kill at a "relatively large" distance. But you can't use it to kill someone on the other side of the map. I guess the biggest issue here is probably map size. If maps aren't all that big, Sniper Rifles have less use by definition.

In CQC, the issue might be slightly bigger. But I'm not sure that's really preventable without having silly systems in place. I mean, if you are in my face and I have a fully automatic assault rifle, you're in trouble. A shotgun is still more effective due to requiring less precise aim as well as having more power per shot. I.e. aim in general direction, pull trigger (maybe twice), win. An HMG has other pro's and con's, but in my experience if I get into the path and range of a heavy wielding an HMG, he has a distinct advantage in that encounter.

Other more specialised roles are often so far from an AR in functionality it's hard to really compare them. MD's, Forge Guns... I really wouldn't know how to determine whether these are "balanced" or not in respect to an AR.

Again, I don't necessarily disagree with you. But, I think it is inevitable that the AR will be the most common weapon. I also think it is inevitable that it will be very good in most situations. It's the basis of the design of an Assault Rifle: A versatile weapon that performs well in most situations that a soldier might encounter. I think most real AR's actually even have a semi-auto, burst and full-auto function built in, which we need to use different AR's for in this game. Specialised weapons are meant for specialised tasks. They are usually not meant to go one-on-one with an AR. It also doesn't make sense to have many people using specialised weapons.

I don't necessarily like to make real-world comparisons, as this is a game and should be about good gameplay more than realism, but I feel it's hard not to in this case. Take a look at the wikipedia entry for "assault rifle". One thing jumps out at me: "Assault rifles are the standard service rifles in most modern armies." The entry explains at length why that is. Other weapons are used in armies, but the basic infantry will use AR's.

Sniper rifles have a very distinct role and are very useful. But you don't have an army full of snipers.
Shotguns have their use as well in specific CQC situations as well as a panic defense weapon, but for general infantry work... not really.
Submachine guns are usually used in tighter situations and versus unarmored opponents. In the military, they are mostly replaced by AR's.

The HMG as we have it in game is hard to compare to "real life" situations, since HMG's are usually mounted or at least stationary. Technically, the HMG should be superior in all aspects (barring the use for more precision that an AR would allow by single/burst shooting), and should be effective both against infantry as well as (light) vehicles. That's a lot to give to a class that also has very high survivability if it's all to be balanced with reduced mobility...

yeah.. dont whine about that, its a friggin' projected energy laser at a high enough frequency to melt armor. if you're having issues with that, then learn to move fast between cover. the only time LR is dangerous to armor is near the emergency heat vent temp, and that takes over half a battery to do. and there is something to distort sight with the laser rifle, its a bunch of plasma vapors that come up in your face when you aim with it.

Again, Damage Mods without stacking penalties. The weapons are fine, its the Damage Mods.

Not quite so. While yes, the stacking penalties are not being applied to Damage Mods at this time it really isn't much of a difference.

EVE-Wiki: Stacking Penalties

3x 10% damage modifiers with compound bonus: 33%
3x 10% damage modifiers with no penalty: 30%
3x 10% damage modifiers with stacking penalty: 26.4%

Difference: 5.6% / 2.6% depending on if its compound or not. That's roughly 25 DPS extra for the Duvolle. Not much.

Now 4x modifiers does get a bit broken. 44% compounded vs 29.9% with penalty. That's roughly 75 DPS extra for the Duvolle. But that requires a Proto VK.0 Logi or Proto VK.1 Assault / Logi to fit.

The real problem is the lack of recoil and the clip size as others have stated before. The AR can hit you at 80+ meters dead on with continuous automatic fire and put out near it's full DPS. And since it's so accurate excellent players can get a stream of headshots and just decimate. If there was spread or recoil at longer ranges then the AR would be better. Heck, keeping it's stats the same but having it get more inaccurate the longer you fired would probably stop most of the issues. That would line it up with reality, keep it as a versatile weapon, but ensue that it isn't the King of all Trades it is close to being today.

Have to agree. I played a Type-A and VK.0 Heavy with 1000+ armor. I should fear the Laser Rifle and it's armor melting craziness or the Shotgun and its ability to blast me to shreds. But I actually fear the Assault Rifle and it's ability to seemingly hit me from anywhere, regardless of cover, with a stream of bullets that rips my armor to shreds in half a second with precision accuracy.

Needless to say I don't play Armor Heavies anymore. Losing a 100K Proto Heavy suit to a Duvolle in 1.3 seconds when I had 1000+ HP was infuriating. It very well could be me sucking, or it could be that there's a slight problem when I fear the jack of all trades weapon 50x more than the weapons specifically designed to counter my class (IE: LR and Shotgun).

Yay English!

I agree that the AR isn't 'OP' but it is definitely the Master of all Trades.

I have stopped using other weapons that I *WANT* to use (Mass Driver and Laser Rifle) because I die at least twice, if not three, times more often.

My suggestion would be to have only Advanced tier and higher grades of ARs be fully automatic. All others should be burst fire.

I praise Aeon Amadi and others for valiantly making the case for balancing the Assault Rifle (yet again), but come on guys, we've been down this road before.
All we did was lose the AR variant that we love the most.... the Tac. (A true precision weapon that required skill.)

As logical and backed by numbers as they may be, I doubt CCP agrees with the arguments. Their actions reveal this:
-Tighter red zones overall were implemented in Ambush, to ensure everyone was within range of AR ( and dropships within range of AV).

- Scopes removed from the full-auto ARs made a superficial and temporary hit to overall AR accuracy. The "kick" and so-called "recoil" added takes a little over 3 seconds to appear, and is BARELY there when it does. (Come on, they knew this didn't change anything.)

If the ARs work as the devs intended, then surely they know that a fully spec'd assault with fully spec'd AR is the King of the battlefield. Niches be damned.

That's why I asked for ARs to become a sidearm, and Vermaak Doe asked for carbine sidearm variants. If the weapon can't be rebalanced, we should at least get access to it.

But I still stand by this OP and the arguments for rebalance presented.

100% agree. People had been whining about LR needed a nerf. I've always said it'd be fine if armor had like double the resistance to lasers that it has now.

So the smg, hmg, and mass driver are from my imagination?

I always thought of Heavies as a suppression platform, Assault clears a path to the next cover, heavy moves up and starts laying suppression for the Assault to move to the new cover. Heavy constantly laying down DPS whether there is something there to shoot or not. Make them keep their heads down.

In this case, of course a up close Assault will always win, they are supposed to be more mobile, accurate and versatile. They are the base runners.

If you consider the actual mathematical values the AR loses to these weapons in stats. Which means its more the user who determines how good it is.

I get destroyed by heavies all the time, what game are you playing? Two seconds is also a damn long time, an HMG will ruin your day in much less than a second if the user is skilled.

I think what's happening here is a case of misunderstanding. The AR is easier to skill into and therefore players are "better" more quickly. If we pit proto AR vs proto HMG in a mano e mano duel the HMG will win within optimal HANDS DOWN. The AR will obviously destroy him at longer ranges because that's it's drawiback: It isn't better than any weapon in their designed roles.

Lasers are definitely top 2 of most cheasiest weapons in the game. It's funny when people say lasers are only good at long distances but forget that laser users equip themselves with smgs just in case someone sneaks up on them.

So you're purposefully being ignorant, it's problem is that it cuts through armor the same way it does through shields

Now that you're done ranting like an ignorant child ADMIT THE DAMAGE VS ARMOR IS BROKEN. Despite it being intended to do less damage to armor INCLUDING DURING THE DAMAGE INCREASE it does the exact same damage to both which is utter bullsh*t for a weapon meant to damage shields. Do you ever see smgs, mass drivers, or hmgs give the same dps towards shields and armor? Yes, the skills are broken but so is the amount of damage applied to armor, which offsets the broken skills. You whine that the Ar is broken all day only to ignore the fact that the lr is too, open your damn eyes .