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

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.


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?
Nightbird Aeon Ahrendee Mercenaries Omega Commission 168	Posted - 2013.06.06 15:38:00 - [2] - 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.
Nightbird Aeon Ahrendee Mercenaries Omega Commission 169	Posted - 2013.06.06 18:12:00 - [3] - 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.
Nightbird Aeon Ahrendee Mercenaries Omega Commission 169	Posted - 2013.06.06 19:46:00 - [4] - 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?
Nightbird Aeon Ahrendee Mercenaries Omega Commission 169	Posted - 2013.06.06 20:02:00 - [5] - 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 :)
Nightbird Aeon Ahrendee Mercenaries Omega Commission 169	Posted - 2013.06.06 20:11:00 - [6] - 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 - [7] - 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?
Nightbird Aeon Ahrendee Mercenaries Omega Commission 172	Posted - 2013.06.07 13:22:00 - [8] - Quote Happy Violentime wrote: Nightbird Aeon wrote: 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? Shall I tell you why? Seeing as you have already admitted to not using a TAC AR before uprising. rollseyes In Chromosome the TAC AR had an enormous amount of recoil making the gun practically useless. Recoil was added as a fix (for the same issues encountered in Uprising - modded controller abuse etc.) I'm finding the TAC now to be a useful weapon in the right circumstances, pick your targets well and work with a team.. I was spec'ed into ARs in Chromosome, and tried all of them. However, after trying them all, my go-to was the GEK or Duvolle (standard ARs). I tried all the ARs in Chromosome, and the reason I didn't use the TAC wasn't the recoil (or lack thereof)... it was because I could get enough range from the others, which were full auto. I could deal with the greater dispersion at range, because I was getting an automatic rifle and I had either 60 or 72 rounds in the mag. When Uprising dropped, and i started not being able to hit ranged things, I switched to the TAC.... and I would have used the TAC if it only had 15 rounds and was 25 points lower damage... because when I pointed at something and pulled the trigger, I knew that my rounds would get to the target and not disappear into thin air. Like I've said before... a fix for the TAR would have been to increase the range on the other ARs.