That doesn't disprove your assertion that a very small portion of them players play PC, and thus also dilutes any remaining efficacy vs zdubs post concerning starcraft.

Keep trying yo. I know you won't change, because being wrong is difficult and it's the internet. But just chill dude. Wp's? how many? I'm betting in the 250k range.

i'm curious does anyone actually think a larger pool of games would net results where the AR isn't still on top?

I do agree a larger pool should be used for a better analysis but I don't suspect the top 6 weapons to be much different.....except for turrets no idea how that got up on the list.

Well, actually yeah, it does. 5k concurrent is a lot more than 1000 players maximum. Really? You're confused by this. Also, I collected data from a pub match, while I played - of other people's numbers. WP have nothing to do with this, this is what most of the Dust players experience. What's your point?

The only thing that could be wrong, is my interpretation of the data, so I'm not sure where you're going with the epeen thing, but good luck with that.

Where are you getting 100 players maximum? Data? Or are you just pulling that out of your ass?

Where are you getting 1000 players maximum? Data? Or are you just pulling that out of your ass based on my lowballed guestimation?

WP's indicate time spent playing. I just wonder if you forum warrior more than playing...

I missed a zero. My apologies, please see the corrected post. Um, yeah, I'm comparing the number of known Dust players to your assertion of how many people play PC.

It is well known that there are few players playing PC as compared to everything else, but I don't have any real numbers to back up the actual amount. Do you?

Welp I have just pictures or video from the matches I've played. I would guess just from the matches vs si and gac I've seen upwards of 100 different people playing. If you were to count just the number I've played with and against the number would be close to 500 different characters. This is playing about 30-40 different corps (some who don't even own PC districts like subdreddit/pro) I'm guessing closer to one 2 tenths of dust during US primetime are participating in pc matches, and that during the day you could still have about 300+ people participating daily.

I play everyday. I have been in the game since closed beta. I don't have 1mil SP. I have a job, things to do, other things to play. I have more than 250k though. Also, as I noted, the point was to get as random a sample as I could.

The point isn't "me", the point is what the killfeeds show.


Again, for the record, I'll take data over speculation anytime - even over my own speculation.

1 mil sp? Wanna edit that? If you've been playing since closed bete then that char would have at least 5 mil sp if you never played it. I have alts with 5 mill that I began in april and only capped 3 times.

Well, that might be enough to balance around, but I don't really know. Only CCP really knows.

I sure hope so dammit, PC should be a huge factor IMO in balancing. Honestly I think kill feeds are also only showing what landed the final blow, not what all went into the kill or what people were running. For example. When I played pc vs Outer Heaven recently, people would rush me with fused and core flaylock, unload everything, then bust out there ar and finish me off. Kill feed says Duvolle....but the story wasn't so simple.

This is semi true. What you describe is a choice as well. For example, I have three weapons into proficiency, and most of my core skills. I don't have any proto suits though.

So people do spec differently as well.

I'd also like to point out that we saw plenty of people jump into the TAR bandwagon rapidly, despite it being meta 4 or 5. Granted it was in the AR tree, and still is, but we've also had respecs since then too. So, people can move, but I agree it isn't entirely fluid.

My point is that based on the data, now, the FP is not OP. If anything is, it's the AR. this is all subject to change as the game evolves though.

In short, this pistol will become more popular as people get more SP to spend on it. Just because its more common for an AR to be in a match then other weapons does not mean its OP. And even then you have to take into consideration that there are Four variants of the AR, each of which behaves completely differently then another

And just to top all of this off...... four games worth of data is hardly enough to accurately judge a weapons level of preference in a game. Especially in a game as diverse as this. And to top it off the data isn't even specific. Theres no mention as to weather nor not someone was actually holding the gun, and the skills each of the people had specced into, or the average K/d Of each person who got a kill with specific guns. Theres just too little data to make one broad "AR's are OP because....." claim. God this argument is stupid.

Actually the point mainly, was that the data doesn't (at the time) support the argument that the FP is OP. The AR is clearly the standout weapon in the data set though and in some cases it is used more than 10 times as often for kills as very similar weapons, and based on the second set, we are talking about 850 kills, Not great, but still significant. Also, I have never claimed that the killfeed can show anything other than kills.

Maybe the FP will become more popular as time goes on. But it isn't now, not in pubs at least.

Interesting data, although I've got to side with those who disagree with Buster's definition of Overpowered, as a few important things are overlooked. A weapon that consistently out competes others IS overpowered, but there are other factors that need to be taken into account.

Take the Scrambler Rifle. At first glance, it appears to be hideously underpowered. As others have pointed out, however, it's ridiculously good at stripping shields, although not so much with armor. This means that while it scores few kills, many will use it to damage their target's shield, then finish them off with a high armor damage weapon, like the SMG. This inflates the SMG's numbers while dragging down the Scrambler's, although both are serving their purpose well.

In addition, since you're using number of kills as your metric, you need to take into account how well the individuals getting those kills are actually doing in the match. Often, there will only be one guy using a Flaylock, but he'll go 16/0 with it, while there may be 4 guys with Mass Drives in another match who only get 5 kills and 7 deaths each. Individual skill can make this unreliable, but it's still a factor that needs to be looked into.

There's also the amount of skill and specialization required to use a gun effectively. This, I think is why many call the Flaylock overpowered. It my experience, it's usually bunny-hopping scouts that use the Flaylock, often to the exclusion of any other weapons. This is definitely a highly specialized playstyle, but it's one that, on the surface, seems to require very little skill on the player's part *.Contrast the Assault Rifle which is simultaneously low-skill and general. Pretty much anyone can pop on an AR and get a couple of kills with it. This isn't a problem, as long other guns are more effective in their more specialized roles than an AR is. That is, if a skilled Mass Driver user can keep people off an objective or out of a hallway better than some chump who picked up an AR, things are working fine, even if the MD doesn't get many kills from other sources.

Finally, there's the "comfort" angle. As others have stated, individual preference plays a part, and can even cause something to appear overpowered when it's not. Originally, I was going to use Assault Rifles, but because there's no militia or Standard variant that didn't use ironsight aiming, I went with Scramblers instead. Anecdote=/=Data, but if for whatever reason, someone's more comfortable with one weapon, They'll use it, even if another is technically better.

In short, I agree to an extent with your definition of OP, but find it a bit too simplistic. That said, the amount of kills a weapon gets is the first thing we should be looking at when we call something OP, but not the only one.

*I'm sure someone who uses this playstyle can set me straight about how difficult it actually is.However, seeing a light suit kill two people in three shots before anyone can draw a bead on them makes it LOOK easier than it likely is.

EDIT: And this post came out as far more of a wall of text than I intended. Whoops.

1.) SMG's in my opinion are overpowered (especially the proto version) HOWEVER this weapon has missed out on the nerf hammer because it's an under used weapon. It doesn't get reallllyyy good until you have the ishukone assault SMG with proficiency 4 or 5 so most people aren't willing to make that kind of investment. But that thing is literally the breach rifle on steroids. (in that it has the same range as the breach AR) but it shoots out FAR more bullets. Especially now with the range buffs to every gun. Seriously..... that thing is sooooo good and nobody besides me and some other vets have actually specced into them.

2.) The flaylock pistol IS OP, HOWEVER it is also a niche weapon. Some people don't like it because of a three round clip, others don't like it because it can do damage back, but nobody can deny that three of those rounds at your feet will kill you. I mean..... 200 splash damage??? really?? ffs man! It does better then actual missile launchers :/ and the real problem is with minmatar assaults running around with dual proto flaylocks! that coupled with the fact that weapon swap speed was increased makes it so that the flaylock pistol is practically a better version of the mass driver. Only it costs the same as a sidearm..... (isk/fitting wise).

3.) The fact that both of these weapons are above Scrambler rifles speak wonders. Sure! They have less kills in four matches then some of the more established and prominent guns in game, but at the end of the day that doesn't change them from being OP or Not OP. I mean..... the scrambler rifle is the answer to shield tanking, yet assault rifles are used more, and that's simply because its the most familiar weapon people see when coming into this game. Therefore people prefer them, therefore they are more common, therefore other weapons are less common, therefore people can get upset if they die from weapons there not used to dying from.

What would have been far more interesting is to post up the amount of instances each player in all four matches carried their specific weapons. There could have been 5 flaylock users in each match, but if only 1 or 2 of them got any kills that's all were seeing right now.

And even if it turns out there isn't that many users to specific guns, that too does not prove its balanced. Back in closed beta Tanks = god mode. CCP made them incredibly hard to kill so as to test out how people would react. They were the most overpowered thing this game has ever had. (imagine a tank that could tank 13 standard forge gun shots before its shields were gone). HOWEVER not everyone used them! In fact, its pretty easy to say only a minority of people specced into tanks at that time. I mean if there was 4 tanks per match that build, there was still 12 other people who didn't use them. The fact of the matter issssss

Preference > Weapon effectiveness

People will play more with what they enjoy rather then what is better at killing. This does not mean OP weapons like the Flaylock pistol don't exist, it just means that most people prefer not to use a gun as gimmicky as that.

Actually your numbers are wrong. The difference in effectiveness to armor is 2 dmg per shot. That is the difference. Pretty sure that this is pretty small. remember the scramber gets armor to shield effectiveness of 80-120 while the gallente gets 90-110. The dmg per shot that the scrambler rifle does is significantly higher than the AR because it has a higher based dmg so it benefits more from its +20% and has less of an hit on its -20%. Believe I use the scrambler and I melt armor as fast as I did when I used the AR.

Had a post all filled with math until I realized that you must have been talking about the assault scrambler and not the regular one. The damage is closer if you compare a Carthum Assault Scrambler Rifle to a regular Duvolle, but if we're talking Imperial Scrambler to a TAC, the difference is about 8 points per shot, about as much as a complex damage mod adds to the base. In addition, because the Scrambler will overheat after a charged shot and ~5 quick ones or ~15 regular shots, you can't afford to miss nearly as much.


Also, I should note that when I said underpowered, I was referring to the way the OP was describing it, based on the number of kills, not how good the weapon is. On the whole, I'm happy with where the Scrambler is. I'd like it if its skill went into heat reduction or overheat cooldown length reduction instead of charge time, but that's just me getting greedy.

I used the imp scrambler rifle...you have to remember it works differently....I can get 21 shots out of the imp rifle before overheating and that may not even be the fastest it can be fired. As you hold the button the shot charges so your 15 shots are doing alot more dmg than the 79.2 base dmg...its a small charged shot so it may be even doing dmg of over 100 per sho (not including any bonuses). The differences between the tact and the imp scrambler actually shows the imp rifle being better. tact has to reload after 18 shots.....imp scrambler can fire 21 times before overheating (so but still doesnt need to reload). The dmg of the tact is 72.9 i believe??? Dmg to shields are scrmb 109.30 and tact 92.21. Dmg to armor are tact 75.45 and scrmb 72.86. As you can see the scrmb benefits more from its bonuses and has less of a deficiency for its negative. It does 17 additional dmg to shields.....while only doing 3 dmg less to armor. (assuming my numbers were correct...I used 71.2 for the tact and 79.2 for the scrambler which i think is correct if my memory serves).

actually the data is not accurate since it depends on how you approach the battlefield with your playstyle. while those on the frontlines may have been killed by what the data said, stealthy minjas like me dont go on the frontlines and hence we get killed alot less by an ar. i actually got killed by flaylocks than most weapons because when i tried to shank then from behind, they backpedal just out of convenience and one shot me with the flaylock