|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Muramasa Armads
Defensores Doctrina
15
   |
Posted - 2013.05.31 14:25:00 -
[1] - Quote
[quote=Jathniel]I've been using the tactical assault rifle for a while. I even used it in it's "broken" state during Chromosome, just because I loved the weapon that much. Or at least, I loved the functionality that I felt it should have.
I've noticed that the tactical assault rifle has gotten a LOT of hate from the players. But this isn't for any other reason other than because it works. Properly. As intended.
This post isn't ABOUT the tactical assault rifle. It's going to be about the sense of balance that apparently the majority of us have.
I'm not a huge fan of CoD, but I do like Battlefield 3. So I will be drawing some comparisons between the Dust and BF3.
I don't hate it because it works, but because it's a master of all trades. What significant weakness does the Tactical Assault Rifle have? The answer is none. It's less effective at close range, but so are most weapons right now. Dust 514 battles most of the time are mid to long range which favors the Tactical AR. It has long optimum range which allows it to destroy all the other weapons. Last build the Viziam Laser Rifle was the most over powered weapon, but at least it had a significant weakness. Laser Rifles were worthless at close range and only dominated the Manus Peaks map. Most veteran laser rifles were also stationary which meant that they stay in one general area on a map. You could avoid laser rifles if you wanted to on certain maps. This is a key difference between the Viziam Laser Rifle and the Tac AR. The Tac AR allows the user greater mobility which allows them to roam the whole map and it can be used effectively on all the maps. It also is more lethal with squads because no other guns can produce the focus fire of multiple Tac AR's. That's why you see so many 6 man squads using them. |
Muramasa Armads
Defensores Doctrina
15
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 14:46:00 -
[2] - Quote
Play a game like Battlefield 3. Every weapon is a pleasure to use. You can down someone with a sniper rifle, just as quickly as with an AK. A bolt action will nearly 1-shot someone. Submachine guns are very potent in close quarters. Your life expectancy when under fire is realistically low. In BF3, you can and will be killed, depending on how your team works. No particular weapon stands out as totally superior to every other, and YET every weapon class still has it's applicable role.
And aiming is a dream in that game. Gamepads are dominant (because its the only thing supported), but KB/M guys are able to use niche items like the Eagle Eye to play as well. Yet BF3 thrives. (The biggest debate ive seen with BF3 was with whether or not stingers should shoot down fighter jets.)
I have to disagree with your portrayal of BF3 weapon balance. BF3 has some of the worst weapon balance I have seen in a FPS. The key is that BF3 has multiple OP guns instead of just one that dominates them all. I used to be a hard core BF3 player, so I can tell you that Dice has a very lazy weapon model. The guns with the highest ROF dominate the others and it's not even close. The best class was Assault because the Assault Rifles were the best guns in the game. The game was fun to play, but it did have serious imbalance issues.
I agree completely that aiming is incredible in BF3. It's very smooth and allows you excellent control. CCP should be forced to play BF3, so that they can see what a real aiming system is.
|
|
|
| |
|