Please everyone...

Just ignore this guy.

Don't even bother posting in this thread, just let it die.

Please everyone...

Just ignore this guy.

Don't even bother posting in this thread, just let it die.

It's easier if you AFK

Just because a gun isn't used by everyone doesn't mean it's not OP,
I just debunked your whole thread that you prob took 1-2hours to make, which means I'm OP

/thread

Please everyone...

Just ignore this guy.

Don't even bother posting in this thread, just let it die.

No.

I probably disagree with his analysis (didn't ever really read it)...but the numbers are interesting.

It would be cool to get a bigger sample...multiple games maybe. and broken down by game.

He just likes OPness. He has one in his mouth.

Sorry, somehow I started posting with an alt. Please be aware, that Jeb is me.

Very mature.

I've gone out of my way to be as unbiased and scientific as I can, and provide real, useful data, and this is the best you can comment with?

Interesting.

THEN WHO AM I?!?!?!!!

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 majority 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.

So, I've seen, and commented on, the typical "it's not AR so nerf it posts" and have tried to explain that just because something kills you, but isn't an AR, that doesn't mean it's OP.

I've implored people to check out the killfeed so they can see, themselves, which weapons are dominating the game.

Knowing that most players won't bother, but will continue to champion their own little cause, I've done it for you.

I have compiled the killfeed from four skirmish games today in which I dropped alone. I removed my own kills from the tally. If you'd like, I can let you know what those are.

Here are the results:

Totals for all four matches combined:

Assault Rifle 100
Turrets 65
Sniper Rifle 44
HMG 37
Impact 35
SMG 34
Grenades 27
Misc 26
Mass Driver 20
Flaylock 16
Scrambler Rifle 13
Strike 12
Shotgun 10
Swarm Launcher 8
Forge Gun 5
Laser Rifle 5
Melee 1
RE 1
Unknown 1
Scrambler Pistol
Plasma Cannon
Nova Knives



Now, what can be learned from this. First off, it is clear that all the forum whining regarding Flaylock pistols is just that - whining. It is just number 10 on the killfeed, behind grenades, and significantly - far behind the SMG, another sidearm.


We can also see that players should probably consider carrying more AV, considering impact kills are number 5, and turrets (comprising installations and all vehicle turrets together) are number 2.

Most significantly, the most OP weapon on the battlefield, representing nearly 22% of all kills in Dust, is the AR. The next highest handheld weapon, the sniper rifle comes in at just 9% of overall kills. The much maligned Flaylock clocks in at less than 3.5% of all kills.

If anyone is interested in the raw data per fight, it is here:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Avo42h0_YoMNdEtzNWk4UWRENTRnWVpkQjZJQXhJUGc&usp=sharing


Now, before anyone jumps on and says why haven't I broken down this data into individual weapons, run more games, etc. I'm sorry. I'd like too, but I don't have video recording equipment, so I had my GF help by tallying all the kills in realtime, so sorry, this is as detailed as I can get.

All i'm gonna say is... I hope CCP knows now not to balance weapons by their use in public matches, and instead by their use in organized corp matches (see planetary conquest).

This doesn't represent "OP ness" it represents weapon preference.

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.

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.

Having a niche, by definition, means the weapon is capable of killing in it's preferred role, but not outside of it. This is made plainly clear by the numbers. The Flaylock has a niche, but is not OP.

The SMG, is also, less OP than the generalist weapon of the AR even considering that the AR is a "comfort weapon" for most players. Having said that, the AR represents more than twice the number of kills ans the next highest light weapon. That, my friend, is the definition of OP. The fact that more people carry it is just more evidence.

The SMG, is also, less OP than the generalist weapon of the AR even considering that the AR is a "comfort weapon" for most players. Having said that, the AR represents more than twice the number of kills ans the next highest light weapon. That, my friend, is the definition of OP. The fact that more people carry it is just more evidence.

No it's because the AR is the go to weapon in any shooter.

Flame war in 1,2,3....

If the weapon was underpowered though, they would migrate out of it to something else. Clearly this isn't happening. Thus, people stay with it because it's very effective. Too effective. OP in fact.

Planetary conquest represent a tiny minority of the Dust playerbase, and as such, is relatively insignificant when it comes to balancing concerns. At such time that more players are able to be involved with PC, then I agree wholeheartedly.

No, not really, please see:

https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=75585

Your FOTM OP weapon will be nerfed into the ground

Having a niche, by definition, means the weapon is capable of killing in it's preferred role, but not outside of it. This is made plainly clear by the numbers. The Flaylock has a niche, but is not OP.

The SMG, is also, less OP than the generalist weapon of the AR even considering that the AR is a "comfort weapon" for most players. Having said that, the AR represents more than twice the number of kills as the next highest light weapon. That, my friend, is the definition of OP. The fact that more people carry it is just more evidence.

Are you paying attention CCP? No one in your player base expects reasonable nerfs, you always nerf weapons into uselessness, that's just sad

Just because a gun isn't used by everyone doesn't mean it's not OP,
I just debunked your whole thread that you prob took 1-2hours to make, which means I'm OP

/thread

Well they do hit each OP weapon with thors mighty nerf hammer........

If they were so OP, they wouldn't be rare.

In other words, if you think something is OP, put SP into it and see for yourself.
Btw, how do you explain ARs getting so many more kills than scrambler rifles? I see SRs all the time, so a lot of people use them.

It's because it's a general use weapon. It is the most flexible. It is also the first weapon noobs go to usually. When something kills fine and you already have it then why go to a different weapon?

Just because many people use a weapon does not mean it's OP. This is coming from a SCR user BTW.
(Also I didn't say it was UP)

You can't possible consider this scientific, accurate, or even logical to follow.
If anything, this is everything that is wrong with popular science today.

Numbers from one match is inconclusive data.
Numbers from one match, without some kind of way for us to verify whether your numbers are honest is VERY inconclusive data.
Even if you provided totals and/or averages, from YOUR matches, that data is not conclusive enough to determine whether something is OP or not. Or if a particular weapon is "dominating the game" as a whole.

Your logic is totally biased, and flawed. You take a fragment of (allegedly) unbiased data, and assume it somehow proves your own interpretation. Talk about confirmation bias!
Because someone likes apples, does that mean that hate oranges? Gimme a break...

This is all your "data" says:
"THESE are the kills done with THESE weapons, in THIS match, according to the viewpoint of THIS player."
Period.
From that data, you can draw conclusions about weapons and stats for THAT match.

If you want to raise questions about weapon balances and domination, as a serious player study, you need to get other players in on it. Arrange something much bigger. At least with a dozen or two people, and try for them to get the average of at least 100 matches.

12-24 people doing 100 matches each = 1200-2400 matches.
Dust averages what? About 3000-5000 people every day? 2400 matches times 32 players each match will have about 76000 players run through it. That means that every Dust player online at that point will participate in a match where someone from your study is involved, at LEAST once.

Tally up your data, then present it, and don't make broad, sweeping assumptions based on your data.
Just say, "This is the data that we gather across X many matches, using X many people, under X circumstances." or say, "The data says, weapon X has these many kills."
Data like THAT can be presented to the community and CCP, and they can run the needed formulae to make adjustments IF they say fit, and if the playerbase desires it.

If you're as scienfically-minded as you front yourself to be, why can't you resist the urge to interpret data too deeply?

For any given statistic, you should always get the largest number of tries possible. I think 10 games should be a minimum. Next, skirmish matches are entirely different from ambush and domination matches. I know this because in ambush you don't see as many snipers as you see in skirmish. In skirmish, my LAV doesn't get as many kills as when I use it in ambush. Ambush OMS is what I recommend because it's longer than regular ambush, and there are installations as well.

-XOXO

True, this isn't very scientific. It is only more scientific than any argument put on these forums regarding OP weapons and niches than before. You're right though, it isn't very scientific.

Only CCP can truly bring scientific numbers to the argument. Again though, what I've done is more scientific that what has come before.

Nevermind.

-XOXO

Please feel free to do this. My GF was only willing to record data for four matches. You'll note that I commented in the OP that this isn't as much data as I'd prefer.

I understand.
I'm not trying to be overly critical.
But you can't argue against emotion using logic.

You gotta get on the same page as people emotionally, before they even START trying to listen to reason.

It's like, "idgaf what you're reasoning is. i hate your guts!" You know? lol

Actually it does mean it's OP. Look at it this way, if everyone wants to use that weapon, to the exclusion of the other weapons that diversify the game, it means the weapon is too desirable, and is damaging diversity. this, in turn, means either that the weapon in question needs to be made less desirable, or the alternative weapons need to be made more desirable.

Which should we do with regards to the AR?

Actually it does not mean its OP, nothing should be done in regards to the AR as its been nerfed enough to where its balanced now. Your thinking about as open minded as a fruit fly right now, and im not going to argue the point any further. What ive said already is more then reason enough to undermine your claim, and I think a majority of the people who play this game, along with devs too, agree with me on this topic.

Guns are not OP because of player preference. They are OP because of how over effective they are for the people that do use them.

Actually, no, it doesn't undermine my claim.

An OP weapon damages diversity. The Flaylock isn't, the AR is.

No, if a weapon is effective for people that use it, that is an indication of viability, not OP. For viability to become OP, the weapon must be good outside of it's niche. The weapon must be good everywhere, like the AR, and unlike the Flaylock.

You can't make that statement in a game where there is no ability to respec.

Why does everyone pick ARs? Because its the only gun that works in most situations, and its the most familiar to people coming from other games.

This game is extremely punishing for not putting points into ARs... you need around 2 million SP into ARs before you can even consider yourself competitive... thats months and months of SP for some people.

You can't expect most people to do anything else... it does not mean the weapon is OP or that ARs are killing diversity, it means this overly punishing SP system is kill diversity.

None of these metrics mean anything in a system where you are not allowed to change what weapons you can use, and in any sort of competitive play, you need Proficiency 3 minimum before you are even relevant.

Now... enter into PC... where its much more competitive and people will use whatever OP FOTM they can if it means the win... You wanna know what that most common combination of weapons is in PC?

Flaylock pistols and fused locus grenades. Both of which are being used because they are overpowered.

I've implored people to check out the killfeed so they can see, themselves, which weapons are dominating the game.

I'm shocked that the generalist weapon is being used the most in a game that forces you to spend months to change your playstyle.

Nerf ARs. Do whatever you want with the AR. Skilled players are still going to destroy with it, and they're going to destroy those using it. Most weapons are fairly OP in their own way, AR just shows more because people like to play it safe when they aren't allowed to change their mind.

Assault Rifles are the go to weapon in many if not all shooters.

Sorry bro.

Adapt.

Or cry.

So, I've seen, and commented on, the typical "it's not AR so nerf it posts" and have tried to explain that just because something kills you, but isn't an AR, that doesn't mean it's OP.

I've implored people to check out the killfeed so they can see, themselves, which weapons are dominating the game.

Knowing that most players won't bother, but will continue to champion their own little cause, I've done it for you.

I have compiled the killfeed from four skirmish games today in which I dropped alone. I removed my own kills from the tally. If you'd like, I can let you know what those are.

Here are the results:

Totals for all four matches combined:

Assault Rifle 100
Turrets 65
Sniper Rifle 44
HMG 37
Impact 35
SMG 34
Grenades 27
Misc 26
Mass Driver 20
Flaylock 16
Scrambler Rifle 13
Strike 12
Shotgun 10
Swarm Launcher 8
Forge Gun 5
Laser Rifle 5
Melee 1
RE 1
Unknown 1
Scrambler Pistol
Plasma Cannon
Nova Knives



Now, what can be learned from this. First off, it is clear that all the forum whining regarding Flaylock pistols is just that - whining. It is just number 10 on the killfeed, behind grenades, and significantly - far behind the SMG, another sidearm.


We can also see that players should probably consider carrying more AV, considering impact kills are number 5, and turrets (comprising installations and all vehicle turrets together) are number 2.

Most significantly, the most OP weapon on the battlefield, representing nearly 22% of all kills in Dust, is the AR. The next highest handheld weapon, the sniper rifle comes in at just 9% of overall kills. The much maligned Flaylock clocks in at less than 3.5% of all kills.

If anyone is interested in the raw data per fight, it is here:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Avo42h0_YoMNdEtzNWk4UWRENTRnWVpkQjZJQXhJUGc&usp=sharing


Now, before anyone jumps on and says why haven't I broken down this data into individual weapons, run more games, etc. I'm sorry. I'd like too, but I don't have video recording equipment, so I had my GF help by tallying all the kills in realtime, so sorry, this is as detailed as I can get.

When this game is balanced, every one of those will be the same number of kills.

Unless you go and get an actually decent sample size, this data is completely useless.

Wepons that are used more are not op,they are just used more...That is some twisted way to try to (prove) that the flaylock is not OP.This sure show how people get attached to their precious op guns and are willing to do anything to keep it as it is;)

Over used =/= over powered
Sorry you are not a winner, please try again

General purpose weapons will likely always have the most kills.

Balance is lacking when a weapon, ANY weapon, can't fulfill it's role (plasma cannon, laser rifle). OR, supplants the role of another weapon of a particular niche(Uprising 1.0 Tactical AR).

It's very delicate, guys.
Don't hammer on the OP. His data may not be sound, but his point is still valid.

I've heard this about PC. I've also stated that if someone actually put some numbers up, that I'd agree that the Flaylock is a problem for PC. I don't play PC. Most players don't.

People can respec, and have been given two so far. Also, with events like the 3x weekend we are currently having, people have the opportunity to get into other weapons. See, the thing is, they don't.

We are, what, 5 months since open beta began (3.65 mil SP from passive alone), and AR kills represent two thirds of all weapon kills from light and sidearm. That isn't preference, that a problem for diversity, that's OP.

It does because to be OP, a weapon must hurt overall diversity. Like the AR.

That's only part of the picture... we need to spec into SO much more than just weapons. What you're saying may be true in another year or so... but for now people are still working on their first suit, and their core skills, they can only spare the SP to spec deep into a single weapon for the time being.

I know thats how it is for me... I have 15 million SP.. im still not done with core skills or modules I want, i'm millions away from finishing equipment still, I haven't touched grenades yet at all. I have only one suit I can use, and that is the cal logi I chose... to get cal assault i have to spend another 2.5 million SP... thats 5 weeks boosted and 8-9 weeks unboosted.

So no.. this game is extremely punishing in its SP system... which is fine.. this is what we all signed up for.. but you can't say "waaaa theres no weapon diversity nerf the AR!" when if you had the choice of only a single weapon, which would you pick? the situationally useful one or one that does decent in most situations?

However.. you still can't take these metrics and say the FP is somehow underpowered cause its not seeing the same number of kills in a match as the AR. It takes time and sp to spec the 610k SP you need to get FP Op 5, and thats SP you have to take away from the core skill you were planning to get. Not a lot of people are willing to do that yet.. but that still doesnt mean the weapon is not too powerful.

In the end the TTK on that gun is too low... it take 1.5s to fire all three shots.. and with 2.5m splash a skilled player can land all three no problem. That's a 1.5s TTK on any proto suit... that's too powerful... its almost impossible to dodge with 2.5m splash.. and even if you do.. a follow up fused locus and its over.

Nothing has that kind of consistent TTK on moving targets except for guns that 1 shot like Thales or FGs on direct hits.

AR can't do that on a moving target at all.. period.

The skill system is what hurts overall diversity, people have explained that and many other points that discredit your list but if you want to keep your head in the sand insisting its overpowered just because its the most common weapon be my guest

Sorry about the alt posting again. For the record, Jeb is me. I'm not sure why the setting keeps changing. Sorry for any confusion.

Sorry about the alt posting again. For the record, Jeb is me. I'm not sure why the setting keeps changing. Sorry for any confusion.

Well, it is. By definition.

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.

Wepons that are used more are not op,they are just used more...That is some twisted way to try to (prove) that the flaylock is not OP.This sure show how people get attached to their precious op guns and are willing to do anything to keep it as it is;)

What is your definition of op?

What is your definition of op?

Why is that? You don't like what the actual data shows?

You didn't add a timeline rate for the weapons. Flaylock has not existed as long the AR. Also CCP has their own data and posted in a devblog that they see the flaylock is imbalanced.

Dev blog? Source?

Somebody help me find the dev only topic that shows things that are reported. (flaylock, glitches, etc.)

Actual Data for OP weapon use and OPness
...
I have compiled the killfeed from four skirmish games today in which I dropped alone. I removed my own kills from the tally.

Here you go :
https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=75585

Please excuse my insolence but i have to ask what part specifically constitues the the difinition of the term OP? You dance around quite a lot in this thread i have a hard time condensing the actual definition you propose out of it.

What are the specific qualities of an an item that is is OP?

Data is not the plural of anecdote.

Well I do summarize it in the thread. here's the short description. OP = Overpowered, thus more desireable, thus more people use it, thus it hurts diversity. OP=hurts diversity by being too desirable.

Hold on. An overpowered item is overpowered? That's a tautology. OP is the term i'm looking for, it cannot be part of its own definition.

So, I've seen, and commented on, the typical "it's not AR so nerf it posts" and have tried to explain that just because something kills you, but isn't an AR, that doesn't mean it's OP.


Totals for all four matches combined:

Assault Rifle 100
Turrets 65
Sniper Rifle 44
HMG 37
Impact 35
SMG 34
Grenades 27
Misc 26
Mass Driver 20
Flaylock 16
Scrambler Rifle 13
Strike 12
Shotgun 10
Swarm Launcher 8
Forge Gun 5
Laser Rifle 5
Melee 1
RE 1
Unknown 1
Scrambler Pistol
Plasma Cannon
Nova Knives

.

I just did something similar, but I didn't break it down exactly like you did. I did not record kills that I could not connect the weapon with, and I watched my sister play a forge gunner and she is one mean forge gun sniper. Watched her play 4 domination matches. I put turrets and ramming under vehicle, and explosion as grenades and remote. During the fist match I was positive that flaylocks were going to dominate as they did outgunned ARs after recording the first game but then the numbers changed fast for the other three matches.

AR--115
MD--24
Shotgun--1
HMG--14
Scram R--7
Scram P--3
Sniper--95
Swarm--5
Laser--1
PC -- 0
Subs--20
NK -- 0
Flaylock--20
Forge Gun--20
Vehicle--36
Instalations--19
Explosion--18
OB --17
Melee--2

There isn't enough data compiled here in order to generate statistics with relatively low error.

Ok, read the rest of the sentence please. It's not a tautology, I was merely defining the acronym OP for clarity. Is that OK?

I might have judged too quick there, mea culpa.

So i take it this is the proposed definition:

"More desireable, thus more people use it, thus it hurts diversity."

Let me know if this is incorrect while i think about it.

Actually it does, please see this:

https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=995224#post995224

Aside from that, it is still clear, by the numbers that the Flaylock, or MD, or whatever - non AR - is certainly not OP.

What does OP stand for? OverPowered

It does not mean OverUsed


please stop posting

So much bad logic, I really hope CCP doesn't listen to a word you're saying buster. No offense.

Overpowered, means that the weapon is a problem.

See, every weapon is overpowered in it's niche, so the fact that someone kills you with it, or they do well with it, or even that you always die to it, doesn't make a weapon OP.

What makes a weapon OP is that it's a problem, specifically a problem for diversity by encouraging people to use that weapon over other weapons because it's "EZ" mode. Therefore, OP does mean overused - precisely. Overused relative to the other weapons.

That's the basic idea yeah, that if something is desirable enough that it's squeezing out diversity, then it's OP. This, I take to be a non-subjective, i.e objective, measure of OP.

For the record, even though light and medium suits have a total of 12 weapon types available to them, the AR is responsible for 2/3 of all kills from that group of 12. (according to my collected data)

To me, that's a weapon being so desirable that it's squeezing out diversity.

So to put it in abstract terms: If X is beeing used more widely than others, that is always due to it beeing more desireable than others. Since something that is more desireable than others is OP, it follows that X is OP.

I can't seem to fit the "squeezing out diversity" part into this bit in a logically sound manner. Maybe you can help me with this.

Now, the underlined part is what i find interesting as, if i translated your definition so far correctly, one has to assume this to be true in order for your definition to be valid. Is that so?

I'll withhold further comments until we clarified this so i don't argue against a strawman.

The assault rifle is over powered when they fight weapons that are out of there niche.

I will concur with that but, then the next logical thing we have to look at is if the niches too small.

Currently Distance or redline sniping is able to adequately perform in their niche without too much interference, Vehicles are able to perform there niche with some interference from AV nates, and so can installations.

Meaning only the sniper rifle is the only traditional weapon that can even hold/maintain there niche role for real war points, other niche roles are vastly impotent. Also the forge gunning numbers I got was due to utilizing it as a sniper.

So this game breaks down into just a 5 play styles that can produce/generate stable SP

Assault Rifles
Vehicle/installation usage (not dropships)
Anti Vehicle (collection of AV, Forge, Swarm, since Vehicle kills gives you big points)
Sniping
Medic

Everything else is very hard to keep their niche without falling into the AR world.

lol at your data to prove OPness taken from random pub matches. How about taking data from competitive enviroments such as planetary conquest where most teams are running almost a full squad of Duel Wield Core Flaylock pistols every match which are able to 3 shot all infantry (even the dreaded caladari logi with it's 700 shields.).

The gun is a boob tube, the average player might struggle with the weapon because they aim for the chest or are unable to lead shots, however give the gun to an above average player and they will become godlike.

People keep saying this. I've posted consistently that as soon as someone posts data from PC, that shows this, I will concede that the FP is a problem for PC.

Having said that, the vast majority of players play in random pubs. This means that PC games aren't that important for overall balance, because most players don't experience this game mode.

I've said in many posts that the Flaylock has a high skill ceiling, which means precisely what you say here " however give the gun to an above average player and they will become godlike". Unlike the AR which is easymode right from the start.

You cannot balance weapons at the lowest denominator of players. doing so invites disaster such as the flaylock. Most PC corps have a policy against publicly posting our PC matches for 2 reasons: 1) the might give away team tactics, strategic placement of uplinks and positions. 2) We do not wish to cause harm to our opponents reputation.

okay... so just comparing anti infantry light weapons... (im omitting plasma cannon cause its unclear what the design intent of that weapon was)

We have

Assault Rifle
Scrambler Rifle
Laser Rifle
Mass Driver
Sniper Rifle
Shotguns

Now... the mass driver is a niche weapon... its usage will vary a lot... you just can't compare it. Its a projectile weapon, and it doesn't suit the playstyle of most players. Weapon usage for this should have little to do with weapon balance.

Sniper rifles are niche weapons... in any sort of competitive setting you usually only see 1-2 snipers per team. The only time that numbers skews is when you take your numbers from skirmish, where redline sniping is very prevalent, given there is little incentive to win. (oh look how skewed your sniper rifle data is!)

Shotguns are suffering hit detection issues, but are still a CQC niche weapon. You can't expect to see a lot of usage of this, and that's okay. Some people will want to use this, but it probably wont fit the playstyle of many players, not enough to warrant skilling into it.

Now... we're left with Laser Rifles, Scrambler Rifles, and Assault Rifles.

First off, there is only one variant of the laser rifle, and its also a very niche weapon given its lowered CQC efficacy. So you can't expect to see equal usage of this weapon either. Its also suffering from its poorly placed iron sights when 1.0 dropped.

Okay so now we're down to two racial of variants of... you guessed it... assault rifles.

The only information you can truly get from this 'test' you are doing is that Assault Rifles are preferred to scrambler rifles. Is this because assault rifles are more powerful than scrambler rifles? It might, and an analysis and use of each weapon will tell you scramblers need a buff.

Also, assault rifles have four variants, while scramblers are unfinished, with only two variants. So it cannot come as that much of a surprise that ARs are preferred.

Finally.. you see how high sniper kills are? That's from redline sniping. Its a condition that arises from public matching, where the desire to win is less than the desire for a high kdr, Imbalanced public matchmaking results in one team being pushed completely to the redline by another team, and common issue in skirmish and dom.

So my final conclusion on your data? Public matches cannot be used to determine weapon balance due to a variety of factors, poor matchmaking, a wide variety of skill levels (both personal and in game via SP), and an overall lack of desire to win for many players, causes more impact on weapon usage than anything else.

You must look at matches where teams are in full communication, and squads are preformed and tactics planned based on weapon balance and the types of maps being played on. You're data is flawed, if anything take the data from OMS, where you aren't suffering from bias that is cause by the use of 'redline mechanics' and you have the highest percentage of skilled players, with high enough SP to have actually spec'd into more than one weapon.

You cannot balance weapons at the lowest denominator of players. doing so invites disaster such as the flaylock. Most PC corps have a policy against publicly posting our PC matches for 2 reasons: 1) the might give away team tactics, strategic placement of uplinks and positions. 2) We do not wish to cause harm to our opponents reputation.

There's a little more you can get from this. First off, ARs kill 10 times as often as the very similar Scrambler rifle. Yeah, that's a big red flag.

Second, again, if a given weapon's "niche" is the entire game, then there's a problem and it's OP. The AR fits the bill perfectly here.


PC matches are equally not a good area to balance around because most players don't experience this.

But if 10 times as many people are using the AR, and it gets 10x as many kills.. that makes it OP?

What if people just prefer the assault rifle?

Also... you are completely wrong... it has nothing to do with 'who experiences what'. Its the fact that you want to balance off competitive play, not the random derping of people in public matches.

There's a little more you can get from this. First off, ARs kill 10 times as often as the very similar Scrambler rifle. Yeah, that's a big red flag.

Second, again, if a given weapon's "niche" is the entire game, then there's a problem and it's OP. The AR fits the bill perfectly here.


PC matches are equally not a good area to balance around because most players don't experience this.

Assault rifles have been in the game since it's inception, and with the permenent nature of skill point allocation it's not suprising that the majority of beta vets chose to spec into the known entity. This means that the vast majority of scrambler rifle users are either newer player to the game, or alts with less SP the a vets main. Both would be accurates reasons for the SR recieving less kills than the AR. Furthermore AR also has 2 varients of Officer weapons, the Balac (Which is an absolute beast), and the Krins (Which is more accurate and has a larger clip than the duvolle). Loosing access to these weapons is another reason why top end players with a focus on end game content (planetary conquest) would opt to go with the AR over the SR, whereas the SR does not have any officer varients.

THEN WHO AM I?!?!?!!!

Yes, these are all considerations. Which is why I don't claim that the AR is OP because of a small difference in kills. It's a huge difference in kills. Also, the shotgun, and MD have been in as long as I've been playing, yet their use is miniscule. yes, they are more of a niche weapon, as has been pointed out, but AR kills are literally 100 times more than shotgun kills in pub matches. That is not a balanced AR.

Shotguns have a hit detection issue. Many direct shots often go unregistered with the gun, and for a shotgun it doesn't have a very large spread. This makes it an incredibly hard weapon to use in post 1.2 gameplay where strafe speeds make scouts look like a dragon ball Z episode and heavies look like an NFL wide receiver running suicides.

The mass driver came into uprising heavily nerfed, and has sense been buffed. It's use increased for a while until it was discovered that the Flaylock was a superior weapon with more than half of the CPU/PG cost.

The Flaylock is a better weapon at CQC than the shotgun currently, and as a grenade launcher style weapon it easily beats out the MD especially when being duel weilded.

Yes, these are all considerations. Which is why I don't claim that the AR is OP because of a small difference in kills. It's a huge difference in kills. Also, the shotgun, and MD have been in as long as I've been playing, yet their use is miniscule. yes, they are more of a niche weapon, as has been pointed out, but AR kills are literally 100 times more than shotgun kills in pub matches. That is not a balanced AR.

The other niche is the grenade launcher which was formerly filled by the mass driver, however the flaylock pistol is more accurate and does more damage while costing half the CPU and a grand total of 1-2 PG. The Flaylock pistol is completely superior to it's mass driver brother. I would also like to point out that the Flaylock Pistol currently dominates the AR until you hit the range where the flaylocks missle blows up in the air which is around 60m.

Overpowered, means that the weapon is a problem.

See, every weapon is overpowered in it's niche, so the fact that someone kills you with it, or they do well with it, or even that you always die to it, doesn't make a weapon OP.

What makes a weapon OP is that it's a problem, specifically a problem for diversity by encouraging people to use that weapon over other weapons because it's "EZ" mode. Therefore, OP does mean overused - precisely. Overused relative to the other weapons.

Most good players use Assault rifles, and thus put up much more impressive numbers with it. Shotguns are borked thanks to hit detection and scouts being in a crap spot. Also you can't expect a shotgun to get as many kills as an assault rifle because you have no projection with a shotgun. If you aren't moving, you aren't killing.

ARs have reach and can pick off those stragglers as they try to run away.

Your "data" avoids a dizzying number of factors in an attempt to legitimize your QQ as constructive feedback.

Yes the assault rifle is defo the best LW to use.. hands down. It will stay that way until the Scrambler Rifle, Combat Rifle, Rail Rifle, and Laser rifle are all balanced and have all of the variants (officer included) CCP intends to add.

ARs are preferred simply because they are the most complete (and well balanced) automatic firing weapon (most people's preferred playstyle).

Those 5 weapons, will, and should represent probably 70% of the kills in most matches when they are balanced. As they are the infantry vs infantry weapons you should expect to see in the battle field normally.

So yes... ARs are better than LRs and ScRs, I'll agree with that sentiment no problem. That's an issue with lack of weapon content more than anything.

However... it still doesn't address the fact that core flaylocks are too powerful. The metrics may not be showing it yet in pub matches, but thats due to the slow nature of the skill point system in this game. Regardless, they are far too powerful for what they do.. they completely invalidate both shotguns and mass drivers, and need to be changed.

And its always the same story... std flaylocks suck, adv flaylocks arent too shabby, and core flaylocks are lol. You've seen the posts, same as me. There is only one factor that really changes with those.. blast radius. Its need to be normalized, for the sake of balance.

It's easier if you AFK

Maybe so. All I'm saying is that this is not borne out by evidence in pub matches, where nearly all players reside, yet.

Again, I don't want to play Flaylock 514 any more than AR 514, but right now, it's all AR all the time.

Imagine you are me for a second, and that CCP come to the forums and say "We have a super secret lab of monkeys that are trained to be perfect FPS users. They represent the very best in FPS ownage and only play for keeps. These monkeys have shown that weapon X is way too powerful (or not shown that weapon Y is way too powerful) So we're going to nerf/buff accordingly"

The forums would explode. Players would rightly point out that this lab filled with Master FPS players doesn't represent the "live" game, and that balancing should occur with regards to the "live" game.

That's basically my point regarding PC vs pubs. I can understand, and even empathize with you, if Flaylocks truly are such a problem there, but that isn't the game that the vast majority of players are actually playing - yet, and maybe never.

It would be more interesting if you did this for 20 or so games and gave us an average of each weapons usage. I know it would be a lot of work, but it would prove your point better.

easily fakable

Thank God zdub and deluxe came in here to talk some sense into this guy. Most likely it won't matter what you say to him though. Over 40+ corps participate in pc, assuming that each has a about 25 that participate (most have a wider pool but lets just round down) that's about a 1000+ people playing. There are many many people playing PC, and zbroadway's and other's posts concerning it's use in PC demonstrates that when competition rears it's head, the OP flaylock is a weapon of choice. Sadly sir, most of what you post, while time consuming to read, is worthless and unsound. I wish you well.

P.S. How many kills/warppoints do you have? Have you broken 1,000,000 wp's?

Let's see the numbers that back up the usage profiles that are being mentioned for PC. Until that happens, it's just talk son.

Starcraft 2 and LoL are probably the most balanced pvp games in the world, with most competitive scenes, and the most money at stake in tournaments.

I think CCP could learn a thing or two from them.. you know how they balance their game? Purely from tournament and professional play. Even though that represents the tiniest fraction of their player base. Seriously, the player base percentage they balance around is probably around 0.1% - 0.01%.

They are doing it the right way, balancing around competitive play, not around derping in pub matches no matter how affected the pub matches are by it.. it then becomes the point of 'get gud son'.

However, you are right in some instances. if something is OP in pubs and not used at all in PC matches... it warrants observation as well.

case in point: LAVs.

Few people murder taxi in PC matches, but its rampant in pubs.. okay it probably needs to be tweaked a little.

I'm not screaming for FPs to get run into the ground, however their CQC efficacy is ridiculous at the moment. This isn't as noticeable in pubs because people don't play objectives in pubs like they do in PC. You need to see both sides of the equation in this instance.

FPs cannot be left in their current state, they are ruining PC. You may not seeing this in pubs when 90% of people are either AFK or redline sniping, but it doesn't change the point.

PC may only be a small percentage of this game, but its equally, if not more, important than public matches.

As we've already said. Most of us can't or won't divulge that information. However CCP should have it all from their data mining, and they are the only ones that need to see it really.

Let's see the numbers that back up the usage profiles that are being mentioned for PC. Until that happens, it's just talk son.

They have the advantage of a large player base to do this. I don't think Dust has this advantage, and won't if some balance isn't brought to pubs - before PC.

Um...I counted 40+ corps in PC can you dispute that? Can you dispute that any of these corps have less than 16 players? Can you prove anything really with the small pool of unsound data you're using to draw conclusions? Care to answer my questions regarding your total wp's? Than it sounds like that's a wrap...

Well, the combined data is for 850 kills total.

Yeah, that's still light, but it's still important.

And no, not any conclusion is erroneous. This is the best data we have to date. Anytime anyone wants to pony up some data instead of just talk, I'm all ears (or eyes as the case may be).

This includes PC.

I will still say though, while I understand where you guys are coming from with regard to balancing for skill, you must also balance the actual game, which, right now, isn't PC. As much as you guys think you're important, you don't represent anything other than a tiny portion of the playerbase, no matter how skilled you may be.

What most people are playing, and what most people will continue to be playing is the game for which I have provided some stats.

We sure can balance that other game as well, but it just isn't as important.


Just wait until we have PVE and 10 times as many people play that game

That's not a usage profile. Also, Dust in general is running right now at something like 5 or 6k players concurrent at maximum. That's vastly more than 1k players total.

You misunderstand. I like what you are doing. I will probably post a list myself next weekend. Did you sit though a whole game just watching the kill feed, or is there a more efficient way of getting the numbers?

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