It's FUN to use the tactical, because you can put your enemy down fast...

...and herein lies the problem.

This is a squad based game, and like it or not if you're any good you're moving with at LEAST one other person (buddy system).

In that instance, each of you fires twice and takes down anything but a heavy... or a CalLogi. Three times (less than a second of fire for most... even without a turbo effect) and even the heaviest heavy is almost dead, If not picking his deployment, completely bled out.

Now, let's assume there are three or four people moving together. At this point, it becomes nearly impossible to accomplish anything against this threat, as by the time you're targeted you're eliminated.

This may be a 'fun' weapon for the lone wolf/run & gun player... which is fine. When it's combined with squad tactics it becomes (essentially) unstoppable.

Now that squads can be up to SIX people, at bare minimum that's 420+ damage PER SHOT going out.

Without giving dropsuits final fantasy hit points, there's simply no way to compete with that output. Not to mention you're dead more often than not before even getting into range to return fire.

Assuming you are not also using a TAR as well.

As you all know, this weapon is the go to weapon for noobs, casuals, ringers, hardcore players, CPMs, pubs, PC, ect. We all bickered about the weapon because its too powerful but there has been a lack of proper reasoning beyond bable. Heres my bable:


The Duvolle Tac has 78.5 damage, pretty fair amount, a proto blaster turrent, the ion cannon. does 136.5. about half as much damage, seems ligit. But if you have pro 5 (3% damage increase per level) 78.5 raises to 90.275. If you are in the caldari or mini assult you have lots of high slots (4 and 5 respectably). Slap on 4 damage mods and 90.275 raises to 121.675 damage per shot.

Pro 5 is VERY easy to do and will basically be manditory with the respec and reduction in SP cost. 4 damage mods is ligit if your doing some support gunning behind the scenes, if you disagree it is certainly used in pubs. So with how easy this will be to obtain for alot of players, PC demands this exploit. In conclusion, DUST's most common battlefeild weapon can do more damage than ANY non proto blaster turrent. If you want more sheilds then take off a damage mod or 2 and your doing as much damage as low grade advanced tank turrents.

Lets compare this fit to an Ion Cannon.

This AR does 121.675 damage, only 14.85 damage less than an Ion Cannon
The Duvolle Tac has a 30 round clip wich is about equivilant in the volume of rounds of the ion cannon's coolent before it overheats.
Both have 100% perfect accuracy
Both can zoom
The Tac does not have a small blast but the Ion Cannon does
The rate of fire can be jus as bast as Ion Cannon with no damage/rof enhancer with a fast trigger (no skill required)
Both are hybrid weapons (does 100% damage to both sheilds and armor)

So these are very simular weapons, both doing simular amounts of damage, rate of fire and "clip" size.
If you really wanna, you can have a tank cannon in your hands. Choose your tank cannon and slap on the correct amount of damage mods, you have a blaster. The only diffrence is you can fit your Duvolle in tight spaces

I am butthurt because my unbalanced noob weapon gets proper nerf soon

THIS is the problem.

Your weapon, whatever you use, should down your target, especially when you have lined up your aim, and you put rounds into him.
A squad of six heavies, should be able to deliver a barraging wall of unstoppable force.
A squad of six guys with Geks should be able to do the same.
A squad of six snipers should be a field denial team.

Again, this isn't a problem with the tactical. It's a problem of nothing else, being able to stand up to it.

And it's a joke to see the guy in the vid demonstrating that the other weapons can barely stand up to each other.

I was trying to address the mechanic of targets being hard to hit AND being hard to kill...The last thing we want is for people to be SO upset about getting killed that the potency of every weapon is so diminished that aiming and killing (what a FPS is all about), becomes a struggle.

Unless, you guys are admitting that Dust is simply the game that guys that suck at CoD and BF run to.

I'll just leave this here. (please direct all +1s to Exmaple Core)

Ignoring the fact that the tactical doesn't blow up tanks, and there are a myriad other weapons that are far more potent against infantry than a tank's blasters, i'll get back on topic.

Dust is a squad-based game, yes. How that's supposed to translate into one's weapon not being potent, I don't know.
1v1 combat is something that happens often in pub matches, and often in CQC. The efficiency that the tactical has is quite inspiring as to how fast CQC should be. You can't look at a FPS game, that has guys running in circles around each other emptying their clips and not dying, and call that balance.

That is stupid. I tried to warn about that in the thread I linked to. It wasn't addressed, and was called out in the IGN review, and it won't be the last time that reviewers and people alike see that.

I was trying to draw attention to a broken mechanic, and used the tactical as a reference of potency.

I'm inclined to say that we're NOT supposed to be like Battlefield players in terms of taking hits, or any "modern" shooter. People are fleshbags, and they die easily. It makes sense that a blast of pretty much any weapon will kill someone in a game like Battlefield, because that's not unlike how things happen in real life.

Dust is different. We all have "dropsuits", which are fitted powered systems connected to a tactical netword, shields, and armor. Some suits even have "heavy armor". Further, we can take pains to improve our armor and shields at the base level, and install additional improvements to protect ourselves further. In a way, we're like mini-spaceships from EVE, outfitting ourselves for combat roles and trying to maximize our survival in many cases.

Weapons that have a Battlefield-like effect despite any of our modifications destroy this sort of balance and/or gameplay. If you die in a couple rounds regardless of your advancement, type of suit, and protective modifications - then any aspect of the "building your character" element is moot. You could just as easily do nothing with the suit, and just get the gun that allows you to do that.

Some weapons are intentionally lethal in very few shots, but they do so with certain trade-offs. Sniper rifles typically have a slow rate of fire, a very small clip, a scope that's inconvenient at short range, and abysmal hipfire. Shotguns can drop people quickly, but require you be very very close. Plasma Cannons will kill quickly, but are 1 shot at a time, arc-ing, slow, and only have 9 shots. Etc. etc.

TAR has needed some addressing because it does do that Battlefield bit, but does it with no real trade-offs. Short, long, precise scoped/hipfired... it is incredibly lethal, and combines those "general" all-round features with superiority at range, DPS, etc. So, it's sort of a perfect storm of flexibility, high damage, and being at the top tier in range.

I'd say you should be able to take a foe down fast... if they're lightly armored/shielded, you're head-shotting with certain weapons, etc. However, there's nothing wrong with gun battles taking more than a couple seconds. You're fighting people in armored suits, not fatigues.

Kenderr, did he say 1-2 shots? Your assuming, that shield Nd armor wouldn't matter, if the Time to kill is decreased by tweaking weapons, dmg, spread and dispersion ( u can't just increase base dmg of the weapons collectively as they all have different factors and ways to be implemented, eg like lazer the dmg build up could be increased slightly rather than a dmg increase ) so shield and armor fitting would still make a difference. While stopping prolonged shoot outs, but a few further tweets would be required if this to be put in place.

Such as increased rep for armor repair tool, and shield regen rate. Plus many others

This might mean weapons get their functionally back, instead of the Tac AR being the best slayer. A Hmg pointed down a hallway 30m in length, a realistic fire lane, where this weapon should carve up, if the heavy can aim properly. It should hold its ground, stopping at least for a few seconds any advancing enemy, until they start to flank or get a MD to start lobbing volleys into the wall. But it doesn't happen, the AR can comfortably move into the hallway knowing that he can out DPS and take down the Heavy

I agree with OP, the Tac AR is OP cause it kills to fast, but I think it has appropriate TTK,
I know this won't happen but it's my 2

Ignoring the fact that the tactical doesn't blow up tanks, and there are a myriad other weapons that are far more potent against infantry than a tank's blasters, i'll get back on topic.

Dust is a squad-based game, yes. How that's supposed to translate into one's weapon not being potent, I don't know.
1v1 combat is something that happens often in pub matches, and often in CQC. The efficiency that the tactical has is quite inspiring as to how fast CQC should be. You can't look at a FPS game, that has guys running in circles around each other emptying their clips and not dying, and call that balance.

That is stupid. I tried to warn about that in the thread I linked to. It wasn't addressed, and was called out in the IGN review, and it won't be the last time that reviewers and people alike see that.

I was trying to draw attention to a broken mechanic, and used the tactical as a reference of potency.

The problem is not with the game but with you and IGN expecting the gunplay to be like the competition. Your whole argument is build upon this premise. It is wrong. Your argument is invalid.

You're totally ignoring the fact that the TAR diminishes any incentive to use the other AR variants because it excels in all of their intended specialties. That alone warrants a rebalancing. The fact that it can out DPS a blaster turret on an HAV is just icing on the cake. What are you going to defend next? The Viziam from last build?

Edit: And don't get me started on the scientific applications. I dare you to explain why it's plausible that phased plasma can out range photon laser pulses.

The whole argument is NOT built on such a premise. It is not wrong, nor is it invalid.
.
Comparisons were made with BF3, not for arguing that Dust be exactly like it, but for the sake of pointing out an error in Dust. Namely clunkiness of aim, and the absurd TTK in CQC.

Another person with reading comprehension. Thank you.

I'm not defending the TAR so much so as I'm drawing a complaint against clunkiness of controls and TTK in CQC mechanics.

So u want to kill people with 1 or 2 shots... so Why make Fittings? Why armour and Shield? Why more weapons?

Everyone with the same armour and a tactical rifle.

Sorry but all your statement is stupid

I'm not defending the TAR so much so as I'm drawing a complaint against clunkiness of controls and TTK in CQC mechanics.
The TAR, with it's current iteration, compensates for Dust's failure in both of these aspects.

In it's role, it drops them fast. In CQC, it drops them fast.
Should it be doing this in CQC? Probably not, but if you can hit the person why not? Should other weapons like the breach ar, full-auto, and HMG be doing that? Absolutely. Do they? No.

Should someone survive a headshot from a sniper rifle when the rifle is literally 3 inches from their head? You decide.
Should someone survive a shotgun blast 3 inches from their chest? You decide.

But if you say yes to either of those, you have a very misconstrued viewpoint of balance.

Yes it is.

Lowering TTK while increasing regen rates is a viable mechanic with its own ups and downs but functionally identical to a CODification of the gameplay. Granted you don't spell it out but you are pretty much arguing for it.

Yes it is.

Lowering TTK while increasing regen rates is a viable mechanic with its own ups and downs but functionally identical to a CODification of the gameplay. Granted you don't spell it out but you are pretty much arguing for it.

I'm not defending the TAR so much so as I'm drawing a complaint against clunkiness of controls and TTK in CQC mechanics.
The TAR, with it's current iteration, compensates for Dust's failure in both of these aspects.

In it's role, it drops them fast. In CQC, it drops them fast.
Should it be doing this in CQC? Probably not, but if you can hit the person why not? Should other weapons like the breach ar, full-auto, and HMG be doing that? Absolutely. Do they? No.

Should someone survive a headshot from a sniper rifle when the rifle is literally 3 inches from their head? You decide.
Should someone survive a shotgun blast 3 inches from their chest? You decide.

But if you say yes to either of those, you have a very misconstrued viewpoint of balance.

I've never played CoD, I came from Counter Strike (1.3 to source) and I'm not suggesting that Dust have a TTK like that.
Only slight increased TTK

"CODification". lol...
(English is a wonderful language isn't it. Enabling the coining of all sorts of words. Humor me more.)

Lower TTK doesn't necessarily need increased regen. With Dust, both depends on *gasp* your fitting.
As it stands however, defense capacities far exceed attack capacities in Dust. Proof of this is when you have two guys with ARs, spinning around in place emptying their clips at each other.

Or when nova knives into someone's back does NOT kill them. Or when HMGs at point blank range, do NOT kill a fleeing dropsuit. Or when any gun short of a shotgun doesn't kill instantly on a point-blank headshot.

Finally. Someone that sees the point. I guess I failed to articulate properly.

Your point is taken. These are clones within sophisticated armor/shield suits, but likewise their weapons are equally sophisticated. Lore has it, that some of a clone soldier's weapons are so powerful that they would kill a normal person, even if used properly. Hence why I linked to the other thread I made.

I figure within 10m, there should be an augmented damage of about 50%, which drops off quickly to standard damage past 15m, and within 3m or so a damage boost of nearly 100%. Specifically to get rid of that pesky dancing in CQC, which apparently reflects badly on the game.

My personal view is that the issue of the TAR is that yes, it puts people down too quickly. With the consequences of dying and losing cash in place plus all the upgrades we make to survivability, a weapon should not put someone down so fast. Hell I'm amazed SCARS work so fast when I view it more of am anti shield weapon. Everything should do less damage and be more specialized at the risk of alienating the "lone wolf" aspect.

No, the issue to discuss is the one you bring up in those reviews and is that gunplay feels clunky, especially up close. THATS is the issue, the movement, the aiming, the frame rate. These are things number adjustments can't fix. COD and BF are popular not only cause guns do what guns do but also because they move, aim, and FEEL right. Dust is a chore to get used to. At mid range it feels fine but close that gap and it all breaks down real fast. Point blank combat in the city type areas is abysmal.

You describe the current reality of the gameplay in dust accurately. Yet i still fail to see any reasoning why it is bad.

Nova knifes might not kill someone. Ok. So?
HMGs do not shred everything at point blank. And the problem is?
Shotguns don't OHK heavily armored dudes. Your Point?

The gameplay works (somewhat) and is (somewhat) fun, spoiled mainly by the dominance of one single piece of gear. The tac is the culprit. Not the fighting mechanic as a whole.

Although this was not adressed to me i'd like to commend on the part i put in bold.

Firstly, Dust is not a simulation. It doesn't need to behave realistically. Appeals to real world intuition are moot when the game is not even trying to behave like the real world.

Would i it be realistic if any hit, from any weapon, to any point of the body makes you drop to ground screaming and cussing in pain until some medic gives you some morphine and carries you off the battlefield, making the character unavailable for the nex 8 weeks. Yes.

Would it be any fun. Probably not.

Realism is not balance.

If you're going to lead me into a trap, allow me to answer your question with another question:

Should a plasma based weapon have more incidental damage than a solid ammunition based weapon at maximum range?
Should phased plasma out range laser pulses?
Should one weapon class reap the rewards of all racial takes on the weapon but not share in any of its weaknesses?

Damage in cqc is fine as it is. Have you ever snuck behind someone who isn't moving and put every bullet into them with a not tac ar weapon? They go down in an instant.

Don't buff cqc damage, buff cqc hit detection.

For some reason, the tac just seems to experience better hit detection than most auto guns, I don't why...

I don't follow.
I haven't requested realism. Just that aiming and CQC-TTK mechanics better be adjusted. Guns are deadly up close. Just the gases released from a revolver can blow your finger off.

But god forbid I ask for that kind of realism. No my friend, smoothness of gameplay is my aim.
I simply used BF3 and the tactical AR's proficiency as an example of weapon smoothness, potency, and ease of use.

I can see where you're coming from and i think i understand now what you're asking for.

It becomes apparent to me though, that we won't agree on this subject as i don't share your vision of what constitutes the best shooting mechanics. We would argue in circles until we annoy each other and i prefer to go passive before this happens. I will still keep an eye for out inspiring arguments that i can use against you though.

Fly saf- oh wait...Be well.

Kenderr, did he say 1-2 shots? Your assuming, that shield Nd armor wouldn't matter, if the Time to kill is decreased by tweaking weapons, dmg, spread and dispersion ( u can't just increase base dmg of the weapons collectively as they all have different factors and ways to be implemented, eg like lazer the dmg build up could be increased slightly rather than a dmg increase ) so shield and armor fitting would still make a difference. While stopping prolonged shoot outs, but a few further tweets would be required if this to be put in place.

Such as increased rep for armor repair tool, and shield regen rate. Plus many others

This might mean weapons get their functionally back, instead of the Tac AR being the best slayer. A Hmg pointed down a hallway 30m in length, a realistic fire lane, where this weapon should carve up, if the heavy can aim properly. It should hold its ground, stopping at least for a few seconds any advancing enemy, until they start to flank or get a MD to start lobbing volleys into the wall. But it doesn't happen, the AR can comfortably move into the hallway knowing that he can out DPS and take down the Heavy

I agree with OP, the Tac AR is OP cause it kills to fast, but I think it has appropriate TTK,
I know this won't happen but it's my 2

No traps intended.
You and I have agreed on many things in the past. You should know I'm not aiming for any traps or puns.

The first two questions require techno-babble answers that will lead me off-topic.
The last question is a straight-up "No. There are balances that we want to maintain."

I do mean, that the tactical does things RIGHT, that we should consider as positives for other weapons to have and follow. TTK in CQC, and ease and smoothness of use being the main things.
It does need it's adjustments, but between comparisons to similar weapons in BF3, the IGN review, and the absurdity of CQC in Dust currently, it feels better better balanced overall than every other weapon. (Until, you throw 4-5 damage mods on it of course.) That's all my point was. I guess I was just a little too long-winded about it.

Dust 514 is eating my posts.

Jathniel in response to your post.

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 times 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.