DUST Search - For CCP Wolfman - Lets discuss the TAC Changes

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

For CCP Wolfman - Lets discuss the TAC Changes

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Nightbird Aeon Ahrendee Mercenaries Omega Commission 165	Posted - 2013.06.06 14:37:00 - [1] - Quote CCP Wolfman wrote: Hi We are currently testing an update to the TAC AR and we hope to release it next week. The changes being tested include a smaller clip size, increased hip-fire dispersion to make it less effective in CQC and a lower ROF. WeGÇÖre not aiming to nerf hammer it so weGÇÖll monitor the weapon carefully after that to see the impact of the change. CCP Wolfman Full disclosure up front - I am/was a TAC user, but unlike most, I agree that a nerf was needed. That being said, the gun was rendered instantly unplayable, as the nerfing went too far, and in the wrong direction. So... 3 main things changed.... Clip Size, Rate of Fire, Hip Fire Spread. Damage, recoil and range were unchanged. Logically, it makes no sense to put the hip fire spread anywhere below that of an automatic AR. Automatic ARs have recoil and such, whereas the TAC is theoretically a single shot and therefore has less recoil. Also, as the TAC has a longer range, the angular deviation will only increase over distance. The fire will look like a cone... what may be a 1m wide cone 10m from the target will be a 1.2m cone 20m from the target, etc. Range naturally amplifies any deviation, so logically dropping accuracy below that of a regular AR (auto) is just silly. Clip size.... 100% agree. Way too much damage available in that gun before a reload was needed. Rate of Fire - Agree somewhat. My mouse finger allowed me to get way too many rounds per second, but a hard cap at 400 seems a bit low. I was an AR user before, in Chromosome, but never picked up a TAC until Uprising. Why, you ask? Well, the answer is simple: range. The changes to sharpshooter meant that i was putting my sights over someone, but inflicting no damage to the range hard cap. It doesn't take people very long to realize that keeping range is key, and so people switched to the TAC to keep their RANGE. The Damage that people did was a nice bonus, but honestly secondary to keeping their Chromosome-level range. EVE actually gives us a good balance example here... Javelin and Spike, two rail-gun ammos that fill two different needs. Javelin - Higher damage shells, but much shorter range (-75% range reduction) Spike - Lower damage shells, greatly expanded range (80% range bonus) So... following this template, the automatic ARs, that have shorter range, should do more damage. Longer range TAC ARs should do less damage. DPS is simply a product of RoF and raw damage scores. You can increase or decrease one stat to completely change the feel of the weapon. And unless you want to work tracking into the calculation (as there is with turrets in EVE), accuracy (i.e. hipfire spread) should remain constant. So... here is my feedback following the TAC changes: 1 - Keep the clip size where it is for the Duvolle... but slightly higher (perhaps 20, or 22) for the GLU. It is a lower damage gun, and should therefore have more rounds. 2 - Drop the damage on TACs across the board - in the mid-70s is too high.... range should be mid 50s.... so drop a full 20 points per round. There should also be a larger gradient between the weapons... GLU should have 2-4 damage points less than the Duvolle, but have a couple extra rounds in the magazine. Duvolle should have higher damage, but fewer rounds. 3 - At the very least, return hip-fire accuracy to the same level as other ARs. Perhaps play with the accuracy of the various tiers.... GLU slightly more accurate, less damage. Duvolle less accurate, more damage. 4 - Rate of fire - Higher than the current 400, but less than the Breach's ~540. Perhaps a flat 500, hard capped to get rid of the "modded controllers", or people like me who use KB/M Based on the above, the guns could look like this: GLU Damage - 54 Clip Size - 21 RoF - 510 Accuracy - 58 Duvolle Damage - 58 Clip Size - 18 RoF - 510 Accuracy - 56.5 Anyway, that's my feedback. I'll be using either the Breach or the GEK in the mean time, but I do have to say... how you could nerf the crap out of the TAC but leave the scramblers alone is beyond me. Also... you want game-breaking? How about the free murder taxis driving around? Where's the fix for that?
Draco Cerberus Purgatorium of the Damned League of Infamy 99	Posted - 2013.06.06 15:29:00 - [2] - Quote Nightbird Aeon wrote: Based on the above, the guns could look like this: GLU Damage - 54 Clip Size - 21 RoF - 510 Accuracy - 58 Duvolle Damage - 58 Clip Size - 18 RoF - 510 Accuracy - 56.5 Anyway, that's my feedback. I'll be using either the Breach or the GEK in the mean time, but I do have to say... how you could nerf the crap out of the TAC but leave the scramblers alone is beyond me. Also... you want game-breaking? How about the free murder taxis driving around? Where's the fix for that? Wouldn't a higher clip size on a prototype gun make more sense? Wouldn't a higher accuracy on prototype gun make sense? My militia free murder taxi is still fully automatic and has no need to re-charge my shields or armor to kill your prototype semiauto low rof fully out of ammo tactical assault rifle user or reload my bumper after running over the other four heavy suited mercs standing in front of him so that he can heal them with his proto repair tool.
Zeylon Rho Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 639	Posted - 2013.06.06 15:37:00 - [3] - Quote Hipfire accuracy was reduced so that the "Long-range tactical weapon" was not also an excellent CQC weapon. The rationale there (which is the same for it being a "more powerful gun") is that it's firing more powerful/larger ammo that consume more space in a clip and increase the kick (just like a real rifle). Reducing the hipfire accuracy to limit the roles to which a single weapon could perform was probably one of the most important balance changes.
Nightbird Aeon Ahrendee Mercenaries Omega Commission 168	Posted - 2013.06.06 15:38:00 - [4] - Quote Draco Cerberus wrote: Wouldn't a higher clip size on a prototype gun make more sense? Wouldn't a higher accuracy on prototype gun make sense? My militia free murder taxi is still fully automatic and has no need to re-charge my shields or armor to kill your prototype semiauto low rof fully out of ammo tactical assault rifle user or reload my bumper after running over the other four heavy suited mercs standing in front of him so that he can heal them with his proto repair tool. I was putting numbers up to highlight true variation between guns. Better at some points, but trade-offs. Naturally, my numbers may not be the best suggestion in the world, but they were just there to illustrate a point. The basic argument against the TAC was "I die too fast against TAC users". If you die too quick, the natural fix is to decrease the damage you take... hence the DPS of the thing shooting you. Either drop the damage, or drop the ROF. Clip size is helpful, too, because reload times reduce damage over time (though over a longer term). Proto gun - higher damage, but balanced by less accuracy and fewer rounds in the clip. Adv gun - lower damage, but slightly more accurate, couple of extra rounds in the clip.
Funkmaster Whale The Tritan Industries RISE of LEGION 11	Posted - 2013.06.06 17:05:00 - [5] - Quote I also was a TAC user and believe the nerf was justified. That being said, the RoF change was necessary but went too far. It's now too easy to not suffer from recoil when using the ACOG because the RoF is so painfully slow. I know people will whine "modded controllers" and what not but that was hardly the problem. Yeah there were few people that exploited it, but the vast majority of people (including me) simply knownhow to pull the trigger quickly. The problem is with the damage, not the RoF. The single shot claims to be "medium damage" and yet does way more than the "high damage" breach. The hip fire accuracy makes sense, but make the RoF at least as fast as a human finger can push it (~500) and reduce the damage. That way the gun isn't limited by its meager rate of fire and actually employs a bit of skill due to fear of recoil if you shoot too fast. I'd much rather take lower damage per shot than a stifled rate of fire. Right now I pull the trigger 2-3 times for every 1 bullet shot which is really frustrating.
BL4CKST4R WarRavens 151	Posted - 2013.06.06 17:31:00 - [6] - Quote Its fine how it is, they didnt even nerf accuracy that much so you can still get some decent CQC kills, you just can't go around bullet hosing.
Anita Hardone Fraternity of St. Venefice Amarr Empire 28	Posted - 2013.06.06 17:47:00 - [7] - Quote lol at OP saying its illogical to make the spread lower than a normal AR.... because its not like AR's have a skill that decreases dispersion or anything....
Omen Astrul Holdfast Syndicate Amarr Empire 7	Posted - 2013.06.06 17:49:00 - [8] - Quote Nightbird Aeon wrote: CCP Wolfman wrote: Hi We are currently testing an update to the TAC AR and we hope to release it next week. The changes being tested include a smaller clip size, increased hip-fire dispersion to make it less effective in CQC and a lower ROF. WeGÇÖre not aiming to nerf hammer it so weGÇÖll monitor the weapon carefully after that to see the impact of the change. CCP Wolfman Full disclosure up front - I am/was a TAC user, but unlike most, I agree that a nerf was needed. That being said, the gun was rendered instantly unplayable, as the nerfing went too far, and in the wrong direction. So... 3 main things changed.... Clip Size, Rate of Fire, Hip Fire Spread. Damage, recoil and range were unchanged. Logically, it makes no sense to put the hip fire spread anywhere below that of an automatic AR. Automatic ARs have recoil and such, whereas the TAC is theoretically a single shot and therefore has less recoil. Also, as the TAC has a longer range, the angular deviation will only increase over distance. The fire will look like a cone... what may be a 1m wide cone 10m from the target will be a 1.2m cone 20m from the target, etc. Range naturally amplifies any deviation, so logically dropping accuracy below that of a regular AR (auto) is just silly. Clip size.... 100% agree. Way too much damage available in that gun before a reload was needed. Rate of Fire - Agree somewhat. My mouse finger allowed me to get way too many rounds per second, but a hard cap at 400 seems a bit low. I was an AR user before, in Chromosome, but never picked up a TAC until Uprising. Why, you ask? Well, the answer is simple: range. The changes to sharpshooter meant that i was putting my sights over someone, but inflicting no damage to the range hard cap. It doesn't take people very long to realize that keeping range is key, and so people switched to the TAC to keep their RANGE. The Damage that people did was a nice bonus, but honestly secondary to keeping their Chromosome-level range. EVE actually gives us a good balance example here... Javelin and Spike, two rail-gun ammos that fill two different needs. Javelin - Higher damage shells, but much shorter range (-75% range reduction) Spike - Lower damage shells, greatly expanded range (80% range bonus) So... following this template, the automatic ARs, that have shorter range, should do more damage. Longer range TAC ARs should do less damage. DPS is simply a product of RoF and raw damage scores. You can increase or decrease one stat to completely change the feel of the weapon. And unless you want to work tracking into the calculation (as there is with turrets in EVE), accuracy (i.e. hipfire spread) should remain constant. So... here is my feedback following the TAC changes: 1 - Keep the clip size where it is for the Duvolle... but slightly higher (perhaps 20, or 22) for the GLU. It is a lower damage gun, and should therefore have more rounds. 2 - Drop the damage on TACs across the board - in the mid-70s is too high.... range should be mid 50s.... so drop a full 20 points per round. There should also be a larger gradient between the weapons... GLU should have 2-4 damage points less than the Duvolle, but have a couple extra rounds in the magazine. Duvolle should have higher damage, but fewer rounds. 3 - At the very least, return hip-fire accuracy to the same level as other ARs. Perhaps play with the accuracy of the various tiers.... GLU slightly more accurate, less damage. Duvolle less accurate, more damage. 4 - Rate of fire - Higher than the current 400, but less than the Breach's ~540. Perhaps a flat 500, hard capped to get rid of the "modded controllers", or people like me who use KB/M Based on the above, the guns could look like this: GLU Damage - 54 Clip Size - 21 RoF - 510 Accuracy - 58 Duvolle Damage - 58 Clip Size - 18 RoF - 510 Accuracy - 56.5 Anyway, that's my feedback. I'll be using either the Breach or the GEK in the mean time, but I do have to say... how you could nerf the crap out of the TAC but leave the scramblers alone is beyond me. Also... you want game-breaking? How about the free murder taxis driving around? Where's the fix for that? No
Nightbird Aeon Ahrendee Mercenaries Omega Commission 169	Posted - 2013.06.06 18:12:00 - [9] - Quote Anita Hardone wrote: lol at OP saying its illogical to make the spread lower than a normal AR.... because its not like AR's have a skill that decreases dispersion or anything.... ...which gets applied to all ARs evenly. But you want logic, how about this: More spread is NOT a fix for CQC, and here's why: If someone is closer to you, they not only appear larger, but they take up more space on your screen. If someone stands 100m from you, they appear smaller than if they stand 5 meters from you, right? So.... a wider spread gets progressively worse the further out you go, meaning that you have a better chance of hitting someone at 10m then you do at 20m. This is all well and good, except people argue that the spread fixes CQC, which is false. What it does is reduce hip-fire accuracy at long ranges... on a gun that is specifically supposed to hit things at longer ranges. Now... the damage is WAY to high for a long range weapon. But a raw damage reduction (from ~70 to ~50), combined with a lower rate of fire and hard cap, should balance out any advantage the TAR gets from range and accuracy. Why do you think so many people equip a SMG as a sidearm? Because when the kitten hits the fan in CQC, the spray and prey nature of the gun helps finish off opponents.
ratamaq doc 3dge of D4rkness SoulWing Alliance 23	Posted - 2013.06.06 18:12:00 - [10] - Quote I have to agree that the RoF was turned down a little too much. Most people are saying it should be around 500, which would be good. From the point of view of a life long drummer. 400 per min = 6.6 per second, which is just over 12th notes ( 8th note triplets) at 120 bpm This is way slower than the average person can tap sustained. 16th notes at 120 would be 480 rpm RoF, which is a little under what I can sustain as a drummer. Of course I can double, Tripple, or quad tap much faster than that, but I think an even 500 rpm would be a good balance. The problem with going under what the average person can sustain tap is misfire. I know I can find the sweet spot, but again, I'm a drummer, rhythm is my thing. I think getting the RoF slightly over a reasonable human sustained tap would have the desired effect of what most people were complaining about, which was modded controllers. Taking down the magazine size was the right thing to do.

Zeylon Rho Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 642	Posted - 2013.06.06 19:26:00 - [11] - Quote Quote: 1 - Keep the clip size where it is for the Duvolle... but slightly higher (perhaps 20, or 22) for the GLU. It is a lower damage gun, and should therefore have more rounds. 2 - Drop the damage on TACs across the board - in the mid-70s is too high.... range should be mid 50s.... so drop a full 20 points per round. There should also be a larger gradient between the weapons... GLU should have 2-4 damage points less than the Duvolle, but have a couple extra rounds in the magazine. Duvolle should have higher damage, but fewer rounds. 3 - At the very least, return hip-fire accuracy to the same level as other ARs. Perhaps play with the accuracy of the various tiers.... GLU slightly more accurate, less damage. Duvolle less accurate, more damage. 4 - Rate of fire - Higher than the current 400, but less than the Breach's ~540. Perhaps a flat 500, hard capped to get rid of the "modded controllers", or people like me who use KB/M 1. I mentioned this elsewhere, but the TAR has a higher clip-size than other DMRs in games like Reach, Halo 4, and Killzone 3. It's also roughly comparable to the sort of clip-size in today's DMRs (10-20 being normal). I think they typically do clip-size by weapon type anyhow, so differences according to GLU vs. Duvolle TAR would be abnormal. The Duvolle assault vs. Standard Assault have the same clip-size, right? So, round power/damage is a factor of tier not ammunition or slug-size (which is seemingly determined by weapon type. 2. It's possible they could weather a damage drop, but I think damage-high, low RoF is pretty fitting with the role of a DMR sort of gun. As far as the gradient.... that's sort of an issue across all the weapons in the game. The price difference between proto and standard vs. the actual change in weapon stats is often seemingly small. 3. Already mentioned this, but the hip-fire accuracy change was to keep it to a role. Right now, the Breach assault rifle has lower damage, but better hip-fire accuracy. The idea is that you're going to need that when using the weapon close range. If the tactical-gun has the CQC accuracy of the "close-range" Breach gun, but with more damage - you've rendered the breach pointless. The accuracy down the scope is still superb, as fitting a mid/long-range rifle. 4. I think a RoF hit was needed, though I can't speak to the current rate of fire - I only tried it prior. A breach-like slower rate of fire for a rifle with more damage than a breach seems logical. In both cases the guns are paying for higher stopping power with a slower rate of fire. The Breach's RoF is 400 btw, so it's not slower than the Breach - they're the same. Any attempt at "true to life" sorts of RoF with high-caliber semi-automatics aren't going to let you maintain any sort of accuracy if firing from the hip, or in rapid succession while strafing and ADS. The games that do let that happen are borderline-ridiculous with respect to mechanics. In short, I think the changes are fine and reasonable, and the gun is still quite effective. I'd even say they might want to keep an eye on the damage output. Should it have higher damage than the breach when the breach forces you to be right next to someone? Blaster-tech is supposed to excel at short range, which would suggest the stats should favor the closer-range weapons with the AR. The niche with Blasters is supposed to be high rate of fire, high damage, but very short range. If anything, the in-game descriptions imply harsher changes might've been warranted. The Breach is described as "High Damage Low RoF" while the Tactical is described as "Medium damage, Single shot, with scope". That suggests the Breach should be higher damage than the tactical, and "single shot" as opposed to "Low RoF" would seem to suggest that the Tactical would be firing even slower than the Breach. Going by that, we'd need higher damage on the Breach or lower damage on the Tactical (or some combination) and even lower RoF on the Tactical. This is not to suggest that I think all the weapons are balanced, but I think the TAR balancing in particular was pretty well thought out. For example, the Scrambler probably needs its heat build-up to be changed to "per-shot" instead of "per-second", it has a passive skill that does nothing for the assault variant, the pulse-laser tech should out-range blaster tech, and if it is meant to be the racial-AR that defaults to a tactical setup it probably needs some other changes as well (perhaps higher ammo consumption on charge shots, etc.). Other weapons have issues as well. The TAR changes... sensible though.
martinofski Les Rebelles A Qc 170	Posted - 2013.06.06 19:43:00 - [12] - Quote Not sure I totally understand the OP post. You say the TAR was nerf to far, but the number you propose bring lower DPS, and lower DPM currently we got something around 520DPS and 1404 DPM Your proposal, 493DPS and 1044 DPM. Before the nerf, it was what? 750 DPS and 2300DPS rougly? I don't understand either the accuracy proposal. You propose to increase the accuracy, while stating it only affect hip fire at long range...??. Who hip fire at long range anyway. Why increase it if it doesn't change your CQC capability? Not sure what your proposal would make the TAR more "playable". In my eyes, it would make it much out of place, it would be better in CQC with higher RoF and accuracy, but worst at range when ADS since your bullets are less effective. Explain to me please. without ranting out and telling me it's crap because it is less effective as before (for sure it is). I just feel like you play to much in CQC with it. It shouldn't be a all around gun, the AR is.
Nightbird Aeon Ahrendee Mercenaries Omega Commission 169	Posted - 2013.06.06 19:46:00 - [13] - Quote No one is saying the TAR was fine as it was.... point of fact, it wasn't. People were happily using the GEK and regular Duvolle in Chromosome, but all of a sudden, switched to TAC when Uprising launched. Why? Range, pure and simple. Uprising changed everything around range, and AR users still wanted to reach out and touch someone at range. The high damage and mouse-mashing ROF were just nice side bonuses. Increased range needs a tighter hip spread, because angular deviation gets worse the further you are from the source. The one thing they left unchanged was the thing that needed changing most... damage. RoF affects damage over time, so the change here is fine.... though it should be closer to 500 IMHO. The change to hip spread was unnecessary, a knee-jerk reaction to all the "Its OP, fix it fix it fix it" complaints on the forums. It took a good and much needed nerf, and made the gun simply unusable. Just logically, how does a single shot gun has worse accuracy than an automatic weapon?
Jin no kami KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 1	Posted - 2013.06.06 19:58:00 - [14] - Quote The tar nerf killed the gun unless u taking kills from other guys or already shooting damage individuals.to many setbacks to the gun to list upside I use regular assault guns now moving into flaylock then moving on to ps2 Or other games
Nightbird Aeon Ahrendee Mercenaries Omega Commission 169	Posted - 2013.06.06 20:02:00 - [15] - Quote martinofski wrote: Not sure I totally understand the OP post. You say the TAR was nerf to far, but the number you propose bring lower DPS, and lower DPM currently we got something around 520DPS and 1404 DPM Your proposal, 493DPS and 1044 DPM. Before the nerf, it was what? 750 DPS and 2300DPS rougly? I don't understand either the accuracy proposal. You propose to increase the accuracy, while stating it only affect hip fire at long range...??. Who hip fire at long range anyway. Why increase it if it doesn't change your CQC capability? Not sure what your proposal would make the TAR more "playable". In my eyes, it would make it much out of place, it would be better in CQC with higher RoF and accuracy, but worst at range when ADS since your bullets are less effective. Explain to me please. without ranting out and telling me it's crap because it is less effective as before (for sure it is). I just feel like you play to much in CQC with it. It shouldn't be a all around gun, the AR is. Merci pour la question, mon ami quebecois! (Translation... thanks for the question, my Quebec friend) The main complaint with the TAC was, approximately: "It kills people too fast, and is unfair." So, the easiest fix to this was to lower the damage. Damage could be lowered two ways. First, you can lower the raw damage per shot (currently it is around 75), or you can lower the rate of fire... or both. No one, included honest TAC users, disagree that high-damage and rapid button pushing made the TAC over-powered. The TAC is a long range weapon, and should remain long range. Tight accuracy is required for a long range weapon... and logically, a single-shot weapon should, at the very least, have the same hip-fire accuracy as its automatic cousin (i.e. the GEK). CCP has a long history of the following balance: Short range, high damage. Long range, low damage. As the TAR is a long-range weapon, it should have good accuracy (if not better accuracy) then its short range cousins, and lower damage (damage-over-time, or DPS). So.... my argument is as follows: Return the gun to the same level of accuracy, set the damage lower (by 20 points, to the 53-58 range), and put the ROF somewhere around 500. Voila... a long-range weapon will lower damage. See.... no ranting at all :)
martinofski Les Rebelles A Qc 170	Posted - 2013.06.06 20:05:00 - [16] - Quote Nightbird Aeon wrote: Just logically, how does a single shot gun has worse accuracy than an automatic weapon? It's just a question of balance anyway, not logic really. Else, my HMG would be a kitten madness to the enemy faces, no spread what so ever, crazy dmg, blowing LAVs and DS at 100M+. Saying a gun < 78Hp dmg per shot and the "higher then auto" RoF> to be just side bonus is laughable.
D'squarious Green Jr Opus Arcana Orion Empire 2	Posted - 2013.06.06 20:10:00 - [17] - Quote I am a dedicated TAC user and am actually happy with the results. I would not consider this a 'nerf' as the gun is still useable. The only thing i found odd was I am no worse in CQC with it as the dispersal rate is moot when the enemy is so close even wild shots hit. However in mid range the scope is too slow moving to use, tracking is very difficult at this speed which leaves hip firing at that range in which case the dispersal rate makes this near impossible. I wish i had a suggestion for this, but otherwise, love the fix, love the tears :)
Nightbird Aeon Ahrendee Mercenaries Omega Commission 169	Posted - 2013.06.06 20:11:00 - [18] - Quote martinofski wrote: Nightbird Aeon wrote: Just logically, how does a single shot gun has worse accuracy than an automatic weapon? It's just a question of balance anyway, not logic really. Else, my HMG would be a kitten madness to the enemy faces, no spread what so ever, crazy dmg, blowing LAVs and DS at 100M+. Saying a gun < 78Hp dmg per shot and the "higher then auto" RoF> to be just side bonus is laughable. I agree, 78hp damage per round is laughable, and the fire speed should be limited.... though, not as limited as it is post-nerf. Take the damage down to 55-58hp damage per shot, however, and limit the rate of fire to something more sensible and less prone to abuse... and you're starting to look at a well balanced gun.
Nightbird Aeon Ahrendee Mercenaries Omega Commission 169	Posted - 2013.06.06 20:19:00 - [19] - Quote D'squarious Green Jr wrote: I am a dedicated TAC user and am actually happy with the results. I would not consider this a 'nerf' as the gun is still useable. The only thing i found odd was I am no worse in CQC with it as the dispersal rate is moot when the enemy is so close even wild shots hit. However in mid range the scope is too slow moving to use, tracking is very difficult at this speed which leaves hip firing at that range in which case the dispersal rate makes this near impossible. I wish i had a suggestion for this, but otherwise, love the fix, love the tears :) Wider fire is NOT a fix for CQC. You're 100% right... in CQC, spread is NOT a problem, because they are so close, you hit them anyway. SMGs have a wide spread.... but they fire so fast and have 80 rounds in the mag... so "enough" rounds end up hitting the target. If you suggested making the SMG effective up to 100m and making it super accurate, you'd be laughed off the forums. But no one is suggesting that. Your argument makes the point.... bad hipfire makes the scope necessary, and due to tracking, the scope can't keep up with people at the mid-to-long range.... the range at which the gun is supposed to excel. Therefore.... increase accuracy, reduce ROF and damage (from their original numbers): it reduces the burst damage at CQC, but still keeps a TAC user effective at medium and long ranges... without having massive damage. I have a suggestion to nerf the TAC that doesn't actually change ANYTHING about the TAC: Give all ARs back their Chromosome (pre-Uprising) range stats. Poof... problem solved. Most AR users from Chromosome went to the TAC because of the range nerf to the other ARs.... so wouldn't giving range back to the other ARs reduce the number of TAC users?
RedRebelCork Ahrendee Mercenaries Omega Commission 107	Posted - 2013.06.06 20:50:00 - [20] - Quote I've adapted to the GLU-5, it's not what it once was but it can still get you kills as long as you keep the enemy at arms reach. The Duvolle TAR needs something though. It's identical to the GLU-5 but does 4 HP more damage per shot for a price tag that's 4 times as large.

Berserker007 Imperfects Negative-Feedback 311	Posted - 2013.06.06 21:23:00 - [21] - Quote ok, time to simplify the problem here. TAR: + high damage + out ranges everything aside from SR + higher rof then full auto guns (as dont believe burst is doing a 900+ it says, but isnt used b/c to weak) + = hipfire to full/burst guns + good at all range - smaller magsize - semi auto (not a real neg, but whatever) With the changes done to the TAR it now looked like this: + high damage + out ranges everything aside from SR - even smaller magsize (maybe to small, could of probably went 18/24 for adv/proto) - semi auto (not a real neg, but whatever) Which is how it should be (more or less). If you read the description of the TAR it says its a "medium-long" range weapon. Well, with the old stats it was as good/better in cqc then the other AR's, so it wasn't pure player ability to do it, but game mechanics (that was bad). By changing the TAR, it put it in its proper role of being more of a DMR set role, having more damage per shot, more range, but much smaller mag. That said, hipfire reduction was definitely needed, as the TAR isn't meant to be cqc effective (but it was), yet i do believe ADS recoil should be slightly lowered to aid in its designed role. If you want to look at it via real guns; consider the normal AR an m4a1, and the TAR a XM110 (if dont get the comparison, then google it) Also to the OP, you can't lower the damage, as then all you have is a longer range breach AR.
Jathniel G I A N T EoN. 435	Posted - 2013.06.06 22:03:00 - [22] - Quote Berserker007 wrote: ok, time to simplify the problem here. TAR: + high damage + out ranges everything aside from SR + higher rof then full auto guns (as dont believe burst is doing a 900+ it says, but isnt used b/c to weak) + = hipfire to full/burst guns + good at all range - smaller magsize - semi auto (not a real neg, but whatever) With the changes done to the TAR it now looked like this: + high damage + out ranges everything aside from SR - even smaller magsize (maybe to small, could of probably went 18/24 for adv/proto) - semi auto (not a real neg, but whatever) Which is how it should be (more or less). If you read the description of the TAR it says its a "medium-long" range weapon. Well, with the old stats it was as good/better in cqc then the other AR's, so it wasn't pure player ability to do it, but game mechanics (that was bad). By changing the TAR, it put it in its proper role of being more of a DMR set role, having more damage per shot, more range, but much smaller mag. That said, hipfire reduction was definitely needed, as the TAR isn't meant to be cqc effective (but it was), yet i do believe ADS recoil should be slightly lowered to aid in its designed role. If you want to look at it via real guns; consider the normal AR an m4a1, and the TAR a XM110 (if dont get the comparison, then google it) Also to the OP, you can't lower the damage, as then all you have is a longer range breach AR. This^ smacks hands together to dust them off OP, you also can't make a case for the TAR 'still being good at cqc', because it shoots too slow. You would have to literally kiss a target to hit them with hip fire, even if you hit them with hip fire, you aren't shooting nearly fast enough or hitting them often enough to down them before they down you. A person with a Duvolle regular will drop a guy using a Duvy TAR at cqc... as it should be. The tactical was always supposed to have first strike capability second only to the sniper rifle, and work as a support/flank support weapon to the standard ARs, which it can finally do now, and Burst ARs can now apply just that much more pressure than the Tac. All of the ARs finally synergize properly, and are correctly balanced (with the exception of the Breach). The tactical should have more damage per shot. Not increased RoF, but reduced damaged. Why? Because that's the Burst AR's role. lol Try using an Allotek... those fkers are nasty.
Mother Facker Ill Omens EoN. 2	Posted - 2013.06.07 03:48:00 - [23] - Quote RoF should be increased to 520 for all variants. Leave the GLU's clip size at 18, increase Duvolle TAR's clip size to 24. Leave hip fire the way it is now. Leave damage, recoil, and range the same.
Imp Smash Seraphim Auxiliaries CRONOS. 118	Posted - 2013.06.07 03:56:00 - [24] - Quote I agree about the ROF. It's a tad low. 500 seems more sensible. Fortunately CCP is monitoring it.
Tankin Tarkus Quafe Runners 29	Posted - 2013.06.07 04:05:00 - [25] - Quote id like to know why ANYONE would take a Breach AR over the current Tac the Tac has just under 50% more damage twice the range and the same rate of fire (the breach is 400RPM just like the Tac)
Jin no kami KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 1	Posted - 2013.06.07 05:09:00 - [26] - Quote Yea this suggestion doesn't make sense if the glu has better accuracy and more bullets y the proto tar you paying more for wat damage. My suggestion raise rpm of duvolle give it 2more bullets
Talos Alomar Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 884	Posted - 2013.06.07 06:16:00 - [27] - Quote I think the Tac AR is much better now. It gives AR users a long range option on the more open maps, I'll come right out and say it - The Tac AR doesn't need to be a good gun. It needs to be a useful tool to give the AR users a little bit of flexibility. It seems to be doing that job rather well right now. The only other weapon that even comes close to the flexibility of the AR skill tree is the scrambler and it's assault variant. The AR does not need to give you access to a four different weapons. It should give you access to one that has a couple situational variants. the only thing that needs to be changed about any AR is the name. Call it the plasma carbine so people don't expect "real gun" ranges.

CCP Wolfman C C P C C P Alliance 481	Posted - 2013.06.07 08:54:00 - [28] - Quote Hi guys, We've been monitoring the TAR since the change. So far it is still one of the most used weapons with one of the highest kill counts. However it's no longer in a class of its own which is a good thing. We will keep an eye on it to see how things develop. Thanks for the continued feedback! CCP Wolfman

Cosgar The Unholy Legion Of DarkStar DARKSTAR ARMY 1203	Posted - 2013.06.07 09:03:00 - [29] - Quote Talos Alomar wrote: I think the Tac AR is much better now. It gives AR users a long range option on the more open maps, I'll come right out and say it - The Tac AR doesn't need to be a good gun. It needs to be a useful tool to give the AR users a little bit of flexibility. It seems to be doing that job rather well right now. The only other weapon that even comes close to the flexibility of the AR skill tree is the scrambler and it's assault variant. The AR does not need to give you access to a four different weapons. It should give you access to one that has a couple situational variants. the only thing that needs to be changed about any AR is the name. Call it the plasma carbine so people don't expect "real gun" ranges. This! This! This! This!
XiBravo TeamPlayers EoN. 106	Posted - 2013.06.07 09:10:00 - [30] - Quote CCP Wolfman wrote: Hi guys, We've been monitoring the TAR since the change. So far it is still one of the most used weapons with one of the highest kill counts. However it's no longer in a class of its own which is a good thing. We will keep an eye on it to see how things develop. Thanks for the continued feedback! CCP Wolfman One of the most used weapon bc people used all their sp in ARs. And people are testing to see just how bad it is.



Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

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.