DUST Search - CPM: Feedback Requested, Tactical Assault Rifles

Noc Tempre wrote:

Medic 1879 wrote:

Noc Tempre wrote:

Iron Wolf Saber wrote:

Noc Tempre wrote:

This isn't the damn CPM's job. You literally should be banned from having internal discussions about weapon balance. Do it as Ironwolf, sure. But not as CPM.

Cough* Single point feedback to show to CCP about the TAR instead of several dozen scrambled in 20 different forum sections.

Not CPM's job. If CCP asked you to do this they have put you in the middle and you should refuse. If they want the feedback, they should make a sticky. If you want the feedback to talk about it in the meeting, you are supporting mission creep and abusing your position to make critical decisions behind closed doors. Weapon balance is never NDA material. If you feel this is something CCP *should* be making a thread over, but isn't, then you should be pressuring CCP, not stepping into their vacant role.

So he makes a thread to find out the opinions on something to try and help CCP and thats wrong? Yes CCP should be more talkative but if the CPM did nothing you can bet people would be calling for their heads. Damned if you do and damned if you dont.

Doing it as a community member is okay. Doing it as a CPM is not. Through IRC he said the purpose is not to make a thread to leave for devs to peruse, it is to poll the community to astroturf his opinions where he plans to talk about it behind closed doors. I am NOT okay with "volunteers" unilaterally trying to influence the numbers of the game. Their purpose is a focus group for NDA materials such as 5 year roadmaps to make sure they have the right things prioritized. Even considering talking about minute details like "tac rifle balance" is downright asinine.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Iron Wolf Saber Den of Swords 4044	Posted - 2013.05.11 16:07:00 - [1] - Quote Hey Guys just a heads up. The CPM is discussing the nature of the Tactical Assault Rifle and we would really like to hear from all of you on the weapon. This includes both Operators of Tactical Assault Rifle and the targets of Tactical Assault Rifle. So leave back your thoughts on the weapon we will check back on it.
Medic 1879 The Tritan Industries RISE of LEGION 279	Posted - 2013.05.11 16:09:00 - [2] - Quote Well I havent used it but the damage number looks high and maybe I have just run into skilled users but it seems to have a very low TTK.
Kristoff Atruin Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 491	Posted - 2013.05.11 16:10:00 - [3] - Quote I don't use this weapon yet. I don't want to train assault rifles up that far, but I feel like I have to in order for the game to be any fun at all in its current state. When I get into a game where the other team is using tacticals, it becomes a game of whack-a-mole. If they're blobbed up the only thing that can counter them is more tacticals. It's essentially a sniper rifle without the drawbacks of the sniper rifle.
ladwar Dead Six Initiative Lokun Listamenn 362	Posted - 2013.05.11 16:15:00 - [4] - Quote its high RoF of is being abused by modded controller. so change the RoF simple, been saying it for a while.
Stefan Stahl Seituoda Taskforce Command Caldari State 60	Posted - 2013.05.11 16:20:00 - [5] - Quote Kristoff Atruin wrote: I don't use this weapon yet. I don't want to train assault rifles up that far, but I feel like I have to in order for the game to be any fun at all in its current state. When I get into a game where the other team is using tacticals, it becomes a game of whack-a-mole. If they're blobbed up the only thing that can counter them is more tacticals. It's essentially a sniper rifle without the drawbacks of the sniper rifle. I can't identify any counter to TARs either. It simply has the upper hand and whichever blob brings more TARs wins any engagement, be it in ambush or skirmish. The other blob can only respond by evading the engagement and capping unprotected objectives. That said, I'm looking forward to what the Scrambler Rifle does to the current situation.
Django Quik R.I.f.t Orion Empire 451	Posted - 2013.05.11 16:22:00 - [6] - Quote I don't use ARs but it seems that almost every time I get killed by an AR it is a tactical, whether the Duvolle or GLU variant. There's definitely a problem whenever a single variant of a weapon is the only variant of that weapon type being used. As for the complaints of people being able to fire just as fast even though it is a single shot weapon - it's simple; instead of relying on the limit being applied by people's ability to tap the button fast, limit the ROF artificially too.
Belendur Balfour Silver Gryphons Inc 1	Posted - 2013.05.11 16:50:00 - [7] - Quote First, I have not used the Tactical Assault Rifle in this build yet, I have however been killed by it afair amount. I keep hearing about modded controlers being a problem, however I wouold like a solution to that that would not penalize everyone else too if that is the problem. Second, the lack of a counter weapon. The Tactical Assault Rifle is a medium range weapon. The counter should be Laser Rifles, and maybe MD and other Tacticals. Fix sites on Lasers, and the damage so that it can do the same amount as the Tactical at the same ranges and that should help. And make the MD able to hit out a bit to keep everyone on their toes.
Saoa Scum Judge Mercenaries 7	Posted - 2013.05.11 17:05:00 - [8] - Quote I have been using the TAR quite a bit and i here is my opinion: I prefer it in any situation cause its just that much better, in cqc i just keep hitting the button fast and aim "somewhat close" and they eventually die, i just need a couple of hits. At range i prefer it cause of the obviuos reasons... it shoots alot longer then anything else Personally i think it needs to be looked at
BL4CKST4R WarRavens Orion Empire 47	Posted - 2013.05.11 17:09:00 - [9] - Quote I use the Tac because there are just to many people stacking Shield extenders on Caldari logis, with a regular assault rifle I might as well stand in front of them and walk away. The Tac damage is 100% required to take out these kids.
Noc Tempre Imperfects Negative-Feedback 1497	Posted - 2013.05.11 17:18:00 - [10] - Quote This isn't the damn CPM's job. You literally should be banned from having internal discussions about weapon balance. Do it as Ironwolf, sure. But not as CPM.

Iron Wolf Saber Den of Swords 4049	Posted - 2013.05.11 17:20:00 - [11] - Quote Noc Tempre wrote: This isn't the damn CPM's job. You literally should be banned from having internal discussions about weapon balance. Do it as Ironwolf, sure. But not as CPM. Cough* Single point feedback to show to CCP about the TAR instead of several dozen scrambled in 20 different forum sections. Bottom line CPM is not trying to balance anything, CPM is trying to show CCP there is a need for balance.
Malkai Inos The Vanguardians Orion Empire 38	Posted - 2013.05.11 17:21:00 - [12] - Quote RoF needs to be changed to about what an average human can utlilize to break modded controllers. Also its range is only contested by the LR and Sniper right now wich limits the number of counters too much. It's nigh dominance might vanish once Scramblers are released. If not, shorten optimal and lenghten falloff accordingly to lower damage in extreme ranges. Just checked blasters from EVE, they also have longer falloff than optimal. Free bonus for consistency.
Noc Tempre Imperfects Negative-Feedback 1497	Posted - 2013.05.11 17:27:00 - [13] - Quote Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Noc Tempre wrote: This isn't the damn CPM's job. You literally should be banned from having internal discussions about weapon balance. Do it as Ironwolf, sure. But not as CPM. Cough* Single point feedback to show to CCP about the TAR instead of several dozen scrambled in 20 different forum sections. Not CPM's job. If CCP asked you to do this they have put you in the middle and you should refuse. If they want the feedback, they should make a sticky. If you want the feedback to talk about it in the meeting, you are supporting mission creep and abusing your position to make critical decisions behind closed doors. Weapon balance is never NDA material. If you feel this is something CCP should be making a thread over, but isn't, then you should be pressuring CCP, not stepping into their vacant role.
Kairos Nitak Planetary Response Organization 6	Posted - 2013.05.11 17:29:00 - [14] - Quote I was unaware of the "modded controller" problem until i read this post, so the TAC may need attention regarding that problem. But personally I have started using it recently and find it is a good option for medium range maps. It's not bad in CQ now either which was one of the main problems with it in the last build. But i wouldn't say I have an unfair advantage, I'm just getting a different type of kill than i did with the normal AR. Granted I've been using the GLU version not the Duvalle. It doesn't help that the normal AR has been nerfed in range and just "feels weird" compared to the last build so everyone it looking for a good alternative. I think its worth waiting for the AR buff this week to see if people are still complaining. (maybe they should skip the TAC rifle on the +10% damage buff)
Reimus Klinsman BetaMax. CRONOS. 327	Posted - 2013.05.11 17:31:00 - [15] - Quote With no skills to enhance AR Range, the TAC is to goto weapon for me. I feel like autofire has reigned supreme again. To combat the use of autofire, it would be interesting to see how a variable ROF would work. ROF lowers over time. Say it starts at 500rpm and is cut in half with a second of consistent fire. Could that result in the autofire controllers missing shots, effectively reducing them to fire less frequently? Also the client could simply record the pattern of shots being fired and if it finds a consistent pattern over a few hours or use, it could flag the person for banning, kicking, or some sort of reprimand. Anyways, without people using Autofire, the only advantage the TAC has is its range which is enhanced by the fact that there are no skills to increase range.
ZDub 303 Pink Fluffy Bounty Hunterz Noir. Mercenary Group 91	Posted - 2013.05.11 17:32:00 - [16] - Quote Currently, as it stands, the TAR is in a really good place for long range marksman engagements. It is currently overpowered, however for reasons not related to its raw damage. The TAR is supposed to be a long range engagement weapon, meant to take pot shots at people from outside the normal engagement range to soften targets as they come in and to pick off stragglers trying to flee an engagement. It does these quite well, however its OPness comes from its current strength in CQC combat. Also, its strength in range will be fixed when ranges are fixed. I know people are people who hate its range, but its only because Remnant hasn't fixed ranges yet. Everything in this game needs to see an effective range boost around 20%, including the TAR. There are two primary reasons why its OP in CQC. The first being that hit detection for automatic weapons right now is balls. Honestly its like 10% of my bullets will actually land anymore at 10-20m engagements. I suspect this has a lot to do with the client-server desync issues currently plaguing mass drivers. The second reason being that it has an insane fire rate for mouse users and modded controller users. I was messing around last night and I can empty the GLU-5 in around 3s spamming the left click on my mouse, that's 8 shots per second. At CQC, I can realistically fire about 5x per second, and with two complex damage mods, im hitting around 500 dps in CQC with a duvolle tactical. Its quite high for a long range weapon. LImiting the RoF to 2-3 shots per second would go a long way to reducing the CQC dps potential of this marksman rifle while not making it completely neutered. It might also need a slight damage nerf, maybe reverting the 10% we got the other day. However, and damage nerfs need to be accompanied by lowering the recoil of the gun. Its currently very difficult to do anything with the tac at 80m+ engagements without high damage and low recoil. I really really want to use the TAR normally, and in chromosome it was a laughable joke. My recommendations, as a long time semi-auto rifle user in fps games: 1. Reduce RoF down to 180 rounds per minute. 2. Reduce raw damage by 10%. 3. Reduce recoil by around 25%. If you guys are having trouble finding a way to reduce RoF, consider moving the "Tactical Rifle" into a 'Caldari Hybrid Rifles" catagory and leaving the "Breach Rifle", "Burst Rifle", and "Assault Rifle" in the newly titled "Gallente Hybrid Rifles" catagory. Then give Caldari rifles an overheat/jamming mechanic. Where the caldari rifles jam up if fired faster than the overheat mechanic allows, keep the RoF down to 3 shots per second. CHR Operation would reduce jamming by 5%. CHR Sharpshooter would reduce recoil by 5% Before CHR Passive: Meta 1 TAR could have an effective rate of 100 rpm Meta 3 TAR could have an effective rate of 125 rpm Meta 5 TAR could have an effective rate of 150 rpm My thoughts, all I ask is please consider ways of making this gun useful without nerfing into the ground like you guys did in chromosome.
Telcontar Dunedain Imperfects Negative-Feedback 385	Posted - 2013.05.11 17:32:00 - [17] - Quote Noc Tempre wrote: Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Noc Tempre wrote: This isn't the damn CPM's job. You literally should be banned from having internal discussions about weapon balance. Do it as Ironwolf, sure. But not as CPM. Cough* Single point feedback to show to CCP about the TAR instead of several dozen scrambled in 20 different forum sections. Not CPM's job. If CCP asked you to do this they have put you in the middle and you should refuse. If they want the feedback, they should make a sticky. If you want the feedback to talk about it in the meeting, you are supporting mission creep and abusing your position to make critical decisions behind closed doors. Weapon balance is never NDA material. If you feel this is something CCP should be making a thread over, but isn't, then you should be pressuring CCP, not stepping into their vacant role. QFT
shaman oga Nexus Balusa Horizon DARKSTAR ARMY 71	Posted - 2013.05.11 17:33:00 - [18] - Quote I've tried it, but i don't like it to much. But there must be a reason of why people started to use it so much, i think they miss sharpshooter and they love the high damage it deals. I agree with the high damage but it should have the same range of any assault rifle. I have a question, what means TTK?
Medic 1879 The Tritan Industries RISE of LEGION 279	Posted - 2013.05.11 17:34:00 - [19] - Quote Noc Tempre wrote: Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Noc Tempre wrote: This isn't the damn CPM's job. You literally should be banned from having internal discussions about weapon balance. Do it as Ironwolf, sure. But not as CPM. Cough* Single point feedback to show to CCP about the TAR instead of several dozen scrambled in 20 different forum sections. Not CPM's job. If CCP asked you to do this they have put you in the middle and you should refuse. If they want the feedback, they should make a sticky. If you want the feedback to talk about it in the meeting, you are supporting mission creep and abusing your position to make critical decisions behind closed doors. Weapon balance is never NDA material. If you feel this is something CCP should be making a thread over, but isn't, then you should be pressuring CCP, not stepping into their vacant role. So he makes a thread to find out the opinions on something to try and help CCP and thats wrong? Yes CCP should be more talkative but if the CPM did nothing you can bet people would be calling for their heads. Damned if you do and damned if you dont.
Iron Wolf Saber Den of Swords 4049	Posted - 2013.05.11 17:37:00 - [20] - Quote Hey noc and telc, if you guys want CCP to nerf the Tac AR without any considerations to anything people have said here at all I would be all for it. :D

Noc Tempre Imperfects Negative-Feedback 1498	Posted - 2013.05.11 17:39:00 - [21] - Quote Medic 1879 wrote: Noc Tempre wrote: Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Noc Tempre wrote: This isn't the damn CPM's job. You literally should be banned from having internal discussions about weapon balance. Do it as Ironwolf, sure. But not as CPM. Cough* Single point feedback to show to CCP about the TAR instead of several dozen scrambled in 20 different forum sections. Not CPM's job. If CCP asked you to do this they have put you in the middle and you should refuse. If they want the feedback, they should make a sticky. If you want the feedback to talk about it in the meeting, you are supporting mission creep and abusing your position to make critical decisions behind closed doors. Weapon balance is never NDA material. If you feel this is something CCP should be making a thread over, but isn't, then you should be pressuring CCP, not stepping into their vacant role. So he makes a thread to find out the opinions on something to try and help CCP and thats wrong? Yes CCP should be more talkative but if the CPM did nothing you can bet people would be calling for their heads. Damned if you do and damned if you dont. Doing it as a community member is okay. Doing it as a CPM is not. Through IRC he said the purpose is not to make a thread to leave for devs to peruse, it is to poll the community to astroturf his opinions where he plans to talk about it behind closed doors. I am NOT okay with "volunteers" unilaterally trying to influence the numbers of the game. Their purpose is a focus group for NDA materials such as 5 year roadmaps to make sure they have the right things prioritized. Even considering talking about minute details like "tac rifle balance" is downright asinine.
XXfootnoteXX DUST University Ivy League 262	Posted - 2013.05.11 17:41:00 - [22] - Quote ladwar wrote: its high RoF of is being abused by modded controller. so change the RoF simple, been saying it for a while. +1 Everything else is perfect on it.
Iron Wolf Saber Den of Swords 4050	Posted - 2013.05.11 17:44:00 - [23] - Quote Noc Tempre wrote: Medic 1879 wrote: Noc Tempre wrote: Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Noc Tempre wrote: This isn't the damn CPM's job. You literally should be banned from having internal discussions about weapon balance. Do it as Ironwolf, sure. But not as CPM. Cough* Single point feedback to show to CCP about the TAR instead of several dozen scrambled in 20 different forum sections. Not CPM's job. If CCP asked you to do this they have put you in the middle and you should refuse. If they want the feedback, they should make a sticky. If you want the feedback to talk about it in the meeting, you are supporting mission creep and abusing your position to make critical decisions behind closed doors. Weapon balance is never NDA material. If you feel this is something CCP should be making a thread over, but isn't, then you should be pressuring CCP, not stepping into their vacant role. So he makes a thread to find out the opinions on something to try and help CCP and thats wrong? Yes CCP should be more talkative but if the CPM did nothing you can bet people would be calling for their heads. Damned if you do and damned if you dont. Doing it as a community member is okay. Doing it as a CPM is not. Through IRC he said the purpose is not to make a thread to leave for devs to peruse, it is to poll the community to astroturf his opinions where he plans to talk about it behind closed doors. I am NOT okay with "volunteers" unilaterally trying to influence the numbers of the game. Their purpose is a focus group for NDA materials such as 5 year roadmaps to make sure they have the right things prioritized. Even considering talking about minute details like "tac rifle balance" is downright asinine. Noc there comes a point where your feedback is more destructive and unhelpful, this is that time. I am just trying to help feed CCP the community's thoughts without doing so much massive work on my end.
Noc Tempre Imperfects Negative-Feedback 1498	Posted - 2013.05.11 17:46:00 - [24] - Quote Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Noc there comes a point where your feedback is more destructive and unhelpful, this is that time. I am just trying to help feed CCP the community's thoughts without doing so much massive work on my end. It is destructive to your goal of power creep. It is helpful to the long term health of this community for after your appointed term ends we still must live with the consequences of your actions.
DudeMcGuy 06 L.O.T.I.S. RISE of LEGION 10	Posted - 2013.05.11 17:47:00 - [25] - Quote @Iron wolf Saber, I've been using the GLU and Duvolle TAC AR for the last 3 days. In my opinion it is a bit OP. The stats of all the proto suits running around with it should make that clear as well. There are 3 reasons for this. 1. Higher damage than other AR's by a wide margin. 2. Higher Accuracy due to the scope and aiming issues in uprising (Which should be fixed soon from what I understand) 3. As many, many others have said the rate of fire is too high for a single shot rifle. Since #2 is being addressed by CCP in other ways the scope and kick of the rifle should probably be left alone. If you can Saber, please ask CCP why the Duvolle Tactical went from 49.4 damage per shot in chromosome to 71 per shot in uprising. Such a drastic increase in damage is the primary reason why the weapon is overpowered right now. Then, if you can, ask them why the assault rifle with the highest damage also has the highest rate of fire. (No other weapon has this issue atm as far as I'm aware) My solution would be to lower the rate of fire and lower the damage by 10-12%. But if the damage is going to stay the same then the RoF should be drastically reduced to match the DPS of the other variants. Currently without the 10% damage bonus: Duvolle assault rifle = 12.5 rounds per second x 34.1 damage per round = ~426 damage per second. Duvolle tactical rifle = 13.15 RPS x 71 DPR = ~ 934 DPS. Now granted it is hard to get close to the 789.5 RoF unless you have super fast fingers (or a modded controller), but even if the RoF is say 500, the DPS at 71 per shot is still ~591. Which is rather wide still compared to the 426 of the regular duvolle. Then add in that to even use the duvolle TAC you must have AR proficiency 1, which gives an additional 3% damage... I hope this helped. Thanks for reading.
Iron Wolf Saber Den of Swords 4050	Posted - 2013.05.11 17:55:00 - [26] - Quote Noc Tempre wrote: Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Noc there comes a point where your feedback is more destructive and unhelpful, this is that time. I am just trying to help feed CCP the community's thoughts without doing so much massive work on my end. It is destructive to your goal of power creep. It is helpful to the long term health of this community for after your appointed term ends we still must live with the consequences of your actions. Fine then here's some homework, find me all the comments on uprising's TAR, you have until monday shanghai time. I want extended feedback, comment banter, thread links, history of they players other types of issues involving the use of the weapon.
Noc Tempre Imperfects Negative-Feedback 1501	Posted - 2013.05.11 17:56:00 - [27] - Quote Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Hey noc and telc, if you guys want CCP to nerf the Tac AR without any considerations to anything people have said here at all I would be all for it. :D Don't conflate addressing your misuse of the CPM seat with no care for the TAR. It is because I support every weapon that I don't want the CPM to try and filter which opinions get merit. Leave that to the game designers who are paid to do such things.
Iron Wolf Saber Den of Swords 4051	Posted - 2013.05.11 17:59:00 - [28] - Quote Noc Tempre wrote: Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Hey noc and telc, if you guys want CCP to nerf the Tac AR without any considerations to anything people have said here at all I would be all for it. :D Don't conflate addressing your misuse of the CPM seat with no care for the TAR. It is because I support every weapon that I don't want the CPM to try and filter which opinions get merit. Leave that to the game designers who are paid to do such things. Stop off topic posting. Stop trying to silence the community. Stop trying to tell me how to do your job.
matsumoto yuichi san SVER True Blood Unclaimed. 2	Posted - 2013.05.11 18:00:00 - [29] - Quote in the note of the TAR the damage seems high,but it's the damage, + the high RoF + the range + the fact that it's piggybacking off of the normal AR skills i mean this in the sense of, it has a nice HS multiplier, and more range than the laser, great / shot damage (easily to ~100) yes aren't they supposed to be the same role of mid - longish range weapons ? it just feels superior, + it has the benefit of all those sp also make you a greate normal AR or burst AR user and all i got was lasers, it's not that the damage is high, i think it is, but it's that it now when compared to every other weapon is a standout superior option, great damage at any engagement range <100m with the only drawback being you have to tap you shots not hold the trigger you can never balance weapons by stats alone, you have to look at performance in the field, and even when looking at numbers you have to be wholistic and look at relative performance compared to similar options
Noc Tempre Imperfects Negative-Feedback 1504	Posted - 2013.05.11 18:02:00 - [30] - Quote Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Noc Tempre wrote: Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Noc there comes a point where your feedback is more destructive and unhelpful, this is that time. I am just trying to help feed CCP the community's thoughts without doing so much massive work on my end. It is destructive to your goal of power creep. It is helpful to the long term health of this community for after your appointed term ends we still must live with the consequences of your actions. Fine then here's some homework, find me all the comments on uprising's TAR, you have until monday shanghai time. I want extended feedback, comment banter, thread links, history of they players other types of issues involving the use of the weapon. That is an admiral thing for a community member to want to do. Would make a nice thread on the forums. Perhaps CCP should make one and sticky it? But doing it as research for YOU to take a "community consensus" into a private discussion with CCP is simply EVIL. It deprives the community and CCP of the direct customer-designer interaction. If CCP asked you to do this we will support you telling them "NO". If this is your own initiative, then you have to at least acknowledge that you are reaching for power you should not have. Yes you are doing good. Yes you have good intentions. But your term will end, and soon, and there is no guarantee the next person in your seat will share your integrity.



Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page