DUST Search - CCP: Please buff the Scrambler Rifle

All Channels

General Discussions

CCP: Please buff the Scrambler Rifle

» 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)
Zeylon Rho Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 217	Posted - 2013.05.17 08:36:00 - [1] - Quote Not a buff per se, but it needs it's passive skill changed. The current charge reduction passive doesn't benefit the assault variant at all. A reduction in heat build up would probably be good (5% per level). A charge-only variant of the Scrambler with longer range (90-100) would be good too.
Zeylon Rho Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 244	Posted - 2013.05.18 21:53:00 - [2] - Quote WyrmHero1945 wrote: Since no one is using this weapon, and the small number of guys using it saying it's fine, the chances that CCP buffs the SR are quite low. Either way, I'm bumping this thread so it gets their attention, I really want to know the future of this weapon, because if it's still underpowered by respec, I might just join the large population of duvolle users. This is a good point. A lot of these weapon balance questions are weighing heavily on what would seem to be the best options come respec. If skill respecs come next week for example, and they still haven't done anything with Scramblers (and you only had say, a week to respec), you'd be an idiot not to go to an un-nerfed TAR if you want to be competitive in PC, etc. There's nothing better than a TAR, so, you'd just be gimping yourself with no indication that CCP is looking at scramblers at all. The worthless passive skill is a big issue (change it overheat build-up reduction, or some such). The range being shorter is another, and it's compounded by the dispersion.... which is much worse on a laser weapon somehow. Both issues need to be looked at. As a separate item, I wouldn't mind if there was a charge-only scrambler variant with range well beyond current TAR. Being charge-only would be the sort of limiter that the TAR doesn't have right now.
Zeylon Rho Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 269	Posted - 2013.05.19 07:12:00 - [3] - Quote Some of the range stats are misleading I think. The optimum range on the semi-auto is slightly better than a regular AR, but the dispersion is much worse. An Exile user aiming down the sights will have a much easier time running you down if you fail to initially kill them with a charge shot initially. You can't return that same rate of fire, and more of their hipfire shots will be on target than yours. Basically, it's worse than the range stats suggest.
Zeylon Rho Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 280	Posted - 2013.05.20 00:12:00 - [4] - Quote I know we've seen some feedback on the TAR (from the CPM anyway), but I hope the Devs are paying attention to some of this as well.
Zeylon Rho Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 301	Posted - 2013.05.20 18:02:00 - [5] - Quote XxGhazbaranxX wrote: Clair de Lune wrote: I'm going to bump this for good measure. This is an important topic that needs attention. SR are not viable. Most guns are not viable with duvolles and TAC around in their current form. Nerf hammer AR. That is all. ( By nerf I mean Balance ) I think the passive skill business should be addressed regardless, but the "field" will look different once the TAR is fixed, yes. Though if everyone using it now (the TAR that is) has proficiency V and complex damage mods anyway - even a regular Duvolle will be beating most weapons (like the Scrambler) on range, dispersion, and DPS.
Zeylon Rho Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 317	Posted - 2013.05.21 15:38:00 - [6] - Quote Baldy bonce wrote: Are not the Scrambler rifle and Lazer rifle the equivalent of pulse and beam weapons in eve, one meant for close to medium engagements the other for longer ranges,each with its own distinct strengths and weaknesses ? Scramblers are supposed to be Pulse Laser weapons: Quote: "Pulse lasers have better range than blasters, hybrid weapon from the same class, but do considerably less damage. Anyway, pulse lasers are in favor among skilled pilots because they provide good damage/range ratio. By contrast with beam turrets, pulses fire rapidly several times in a cycle. " It may be that EVE comparison that leads people to believe the Scrambler should compare to an AR (Blaster) in certain ways. Meanwhile: "Beam lasers have a shorter optimal range than their hybrid railgun counterparts, but do, as a whole, more damage. Advanced coolant technologies allow beam lasers to keep firing for a long time without overheating. The heaviest lasers, battleship-class tachyon beam lasers, are regarded by many as brutally devastating sniper weapons (although their range is limited) and are often used in fleet sieges. " The equivalent here being the Sniper rifle, and I suppose the standard Laser does have shorter range than a sniper rifle. Not sure about "more damage" or "not overheating". I guess things work differently in space.
Zeylon Rho Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 324	Posted - 2013.05.21 19:01:00 - [7] - Quote Actually, if the Amarr have great laser cooling technology for ships, wouldn't it be even better for guns? It's harder to get rid of heat in space than in an atmosphere.
Zeylon Rho Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 344	Posted - 2013.05.23 08:52:00 - [8] - Quote I'd figure laser weapons would generally have the range advantage on blasters. Rails are the ones I'd think come closer (or beat) lasers.
Zeylon Rho Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 348	Posted - 2013.05.24 02:27:00 - [9] - Quote The passive skill not helping the assault variant is another issue. A Heat build-up reduction skill would make more sense. Pulse lasers ARE the shorter range range option between pulse & beam for Amarr in EVE, but they aren't CQC exactly. Pulse Lasers are described as "Medium" range turrets, blasters are "Short" range turrets. What does that mean in practical terms? Well, if we just look something like the Medium-sized turrets sets for both, Pulse lasers have an optimum range of about 12,000 meters, while Blasters have a range of about 3,000 meters. So, Pulse Lasers outrange blasters by about 4 to 1 (in EVE). Anyway, better, head-reducing passive skill and a range bump would be great. I get the feeling something like the TAC AR was more meant to be in the Rail Rifle set.
Zeylon Rho Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 352	Posted - 2013.05.24 07:42:00 - [10] - Quote WyrmHero1945 wrote: Zeylon Rho wrote: The passive skill not helping the assault variant is another issue. A Heat build-up reduction skill would make more sense. Pulse lasers ARE the shorter range range option between pulse & beam for Amarr in EVE, but they aren't CQC exactly. Pulse Lasers are described as "Medium" range turrets, blasters are "Short" range turrets. What does that mean in practical terms? Well, if we just look something like the Medium-sized turrets sets for both, Pulse lasers have an optimum range of about 12,000 meters, while Blasters have a range of about 3,000 meters. So, Pulse Lasers outrange blasters by about 4 to 1 (in EVE). Anyway, better, head-reducing passive skill and a range bump would be great. I get the feeling something like the TAC AR was more meant to be in the Rail Rifle set. This makes sense. CCP why you don't do this? The way they are about communication, they "may" be considering all sorts of changes that we just won't hear about until they make them.

Zeylon Rho Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 357	Posted - 2013.05.24 22:26:00 - [11] - Quote Jen Gelfling wrote: +1 For a heat build reducing passive and sensible range. What's needed, basically.
Zeylon Rho Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 365	Posted - 2013.05.25 07:57:00 - [12] - Quote WyrmHero1945 wrote: So I just found out that the SR is super accurate, at least at mid range. This is one of the reasons I'm having so much trouble using it for CQC. The gun almost never hits when hip firing because of the low dispersion. So why make a very accurate gun with only 30m optimal? The same as an HMG!!!! The gun should have 60m optimal and 100m for the semi automatic one. I'll edit the OP. It should be comparable to EVE stats, where pulse lasers have a significant range advantage over plasma weapons. The heat, fire-rate, uneven dmg percentile (shields vs. armor), and large power draw are where the differences should be.
Zeylon Rho Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 377	Posted - 2013.05.26 06:03:00 - [13] - Quote For illustration purposes, here's two roughly equivalent specimens from blasters and pulse lasers. They're both MEDIUM and META lvl 5. Heavy Pulse Laser II 12,000m 4000m 5.25s 3.6x 35tf 231MW 0.08125 Heavy Blaster II 3,000m 4,000m 4.5s 3.375x 33tf 158MW 0.11 rad/s The stats you can see are, in order: Optimal Range, Accuracy Fall-off, Rate of fire, damage modifier, CPU, PG, and tracking speed. A pulse laser has 4x the range as a blaster in this instance, but about the same accuracy fall-off. You can also see a pulse laser uses more CPU and much more PG.
Zeylon Rho Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 378	Posted - 2013.05.26 07:52:00 - [14] - Quote Dust HaHakoke wrote: i dont think giving the SR enough range to go mid is a good idea for one the LR is ment to take over there it IS still viable Lasers are meant to be "Long" with respect to EVE weaponry - comparable to something like a railgun.
Zeylon Rho Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 378	Posted - 2013.05.26 08:12:00 - [15] - Quote Dust HaHakoke wrote: Yes but the SR is a pulse laser and the LR isa beam Right.... I'd say comparably, that a Pulse Laser Weapon (Scrambler) should definitely be longer range than a blaster (the Gallente plasma blaster). A laser should be longer range than either of them (laser rifle - beam), the Sniper rifle is a rail rifle and should be longer range than that. A comparison of Beam and Railgun ranges is relatively much closer than pulse and blaster ranges though. Pulse lasers outrange blasters by 4 to 1. This is a HUGE difference, and isn't even remotely represented well in-game. A medium turret of Beam and Railgun at meta 5 would compare at ranges more like 24km to 29km. The laser has about 82% of the range of the railgun. If the laser rifle and sniper rifle are the current representatives of each in Dust, then it's another super-lopsided comparison where the hybrid weapon has been given a ridiculous edge on something that it's actually very similar to. In both cases they've screwed up the lore of their own universe.
Zeylon Rho Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 403	Posted - 2013.05.27 13:31:00 - [16] - Quote Creedair Talor wrote: The SR is balanced it is a miniscule distance change and you have the advantage of the charge shot, i hit so many people with that then double tap 2more times really quick and they go down. If they have the range i shift my spot in cover or move. There's a few different points here. The Scrambler is a pulse laser, it's supposed to outrange blasters (in EVE, pulse outrange blasters by 4 to 1). Currently, the opposite is true, so a Scrambler user can be taken down by a blaster user at a range where they can't effectively counter. The scrambler is effectively less accurate than a blaster as well, for a combination of reasons. Even without the sharpshooter skill, the TAR is going to get tighter groups than the scrambler, and is much more accurate when hip-firing. Not only is the scrambler outclassed on shear numbers (range, etc.), it has a drawback to contend with - overheating. Besides rendering you unable to attack, switch weapons, or do anything else - it damages you. The AR takes a sizable jump in preference with that alone. The Scrambler passive skill only functions on the semi-auto variant, the assault variant gets nothing out of it. The passive isn't useful to begin with of course (charge time reduction), however - it makes the Scrambler Rifle the only weapon in the game to have a passive that doesn't benefit a variant at all. A heat build-up reducing passive would be more sensible. The charge shot will quickly overheat a weapon, and will be hard to follow-up after the first shot. The TAR wouldn't have this problem of course - without charging at all - they can put very high damage shots on a target in rapid succession. Scramblers also require more tanks in Light Weapon Op to use than AR, which is ultimately the superior weapon. So, basically - there's many reasons one might think the Scrambler has issues. Especially if you have any knowledge of EVE lore. I'd say fixing the passive problem is a big one. Superior range to blasters is another.
Zeylon Rho Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 429	Posted - 2013.05.29 03:44:00 - [17] - Quote There's some incoming changes, or so they say. They're going to increase hipfire dispersion and lower clip-size on the TAR, but nothing else. I think it'll probably still be "better" than the Scrambler at that point, but I suppose if it's clear there's still balance issues after that - they may change things again? We just can't expect the changes to happen quickly.
Zeylon Rho Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 460	Posted - 2013.05.29 20:45:00 - [18] - Quote WyrmHero1945 wrote: Rale Tolemy wrote: my only issue with the scrambler rifle is how quickly it overheats. I think MAYBE if its going to overheat, dont make it use a clip. because then on top of overheating you have to reload. other than that im good with it as is. I think overheating is ok, are you using the assault Amarr dropsuit? It's a weapon that has to be used with that suit because it'll suck with the others. Also it's bad for CQC. It really needs the range buff. I'd heard there'd been issues with the Amarr Assault dropsuit. Is the heat reduction effective?
Zeylon Rho Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 493	Posted - 2013.05.31 05:11:00 - [19] - Quote Talos Alomar wrote: Zeylon Rho wrote: I'd heard there'd been issues with the Amarr Assault dropsuit. Is the heat reduction effective? I'd say so. Good to know...

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.