DUST Search - Testing a Weapon for Its Intended Use.

All Channels

General Discussions

Testing a Weapon for Its Intended Use.

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Master Jaraiya Ultramarine Corp 395	Posted - 2013.07.13 17:40:00 - [1] - Quote There have been several threads declaring the intent to test alleged overpowered weapons in game. While I understand and appreciate the intentions of these players, a few things need to be addressed about this. What is the Weapon's intended use? What playstyle is the tester using? What is the Meta of the tester's fitting? What is the Meta of the weapon? What game modes are the tests conducted in? What maps are the tests conducted in? What Class/Role is the tester playing as? What Class/Role is the opponent playing as? These are merely a few nagging variables which can greatly effect the data streams of these types of tests. Think about this: I personally play as an HMG Heavy. To me the Flaylock Pistol seems very overpowered. It is a CQC weapon, which can take out my 1028 HP in 4 shots or less. I am a close quarter combatant. However, if I was playing as a shotgun scout, another type of close quarter combatant, the Flaylock would likely not affect me nearly as much as it would the Heavy. This is simply due to the advantage of movement speed the scout has over the Heavy. In most cases the Scout could escape the massive splash damage of the flaylock where the heavy cannot. Then take into account the environment the weapon is used in and the fitting of the weapon's wielder. If the Flaylock user is for instance using a Medium Class Suit on top of a structure firing down the Heavy has no chance of countering. However if the firefight occurs within a small room the Heavy as a slightly better chance though will probably still lose due to slow tracking speed. If the firefight were to occur in an open field, the Heavy would again likely lose due to the fast strafing speed of the Medium Class. These are only a few scenarios which greatly effect the data gathered in this type of testing. Thinking about this, IMHO there are only TWO types of weapons in the entire game that to me are OP The Flaylock Pistol. This weapon is genuinely too good in it's intended purpose to be considered balanced compared to other weapons when used for their intended purpose. The Assault Rifle (excluding Breach and Tactical Variants) While it is supposed to be versatile, this weapon is excessively powerful in any given situation. It does its job too well compared to other weapons when used for their intended purposes.
Scheneighnay McBob Tribal Band Dust Mercenaries Immortals of War 2226	Posted - 2013.07.13 18:21:00 - [2] - Quote Again on the flaylock- it only seems overpowered because it's the only proto sidearm you see; people just skilled into it because it's new. Try using it; other sidearms are just as deadly, if not more because they're more consistent. I agree on the AR point. Also, reading the intended role can show if a weapon, suit or vehicle is completely set up wrong. LAVs for instance are only used for their intended role (directly supporting infantry) very rarely- instead, players use them as transports and to run people over. Sentinels are also set up and used wrong. They're supposed to protect objectives (so no **** it gets run over when you leave the objective to cross the street). Also, shouldn't they have better scanning stats then?
Master Jaraiya Ultramarine Corp 396	Posted - 2013.07.13 21:10:00 - [3] - Quote The Flaylock is definitely OP. I'm not usually one to complain about OPness, but it is way OP. I have seen other Sidearms in game and they are very well balanced. The Flaylock is not. It has nearly the same splash damage as the Forge Gun with more blast radius. Its a sidearm for cryin out loud! I was in a match today and a guy went 52/4 with Flaylock and Thukker Nades almost exclusively. I'm adding Thukker Nades to OP.
Xocoyol Zaraoul Zumari Force Projection Caldari State 737	Posted - 2013.07.13 21:13:00 - [4] - Quote If Flaylocks were light weapons I think I would have less of a problem with them.
Master Jaraiya Ultramarine Corp 396	Posted - 2013.07.13 21:16:00 - [5] - Quote Xocoyol Zaraoul wrote: If Flaylocks were light weapons I think I would have less of a problem with them... An ofc that means I'd like them to use more CPU and PG. Uhm...Mass Driver.
Sleepy Zan Sleepytime Gorilla Mercenaries 2436	Posted - 2013.07.13 21:16:00 - [6] - Quote Intended uses are irrelevant the only thing that matters are the possible uses.
Master Jaraiya Ultramarine Corp 397	Posted - 2013.07.13 21:22:00 - [7] - Quote Sleepy Zan wrote: Intended uses are irrelevant the only thing that matters are the possible uses. It is not necessarily irrelevant. If one were testing a weapon to see if it was over or under powered, and used it outside its intended use it would skew the results. For instance sniper rifle in midrange or cqc HMG in Long Range Combat Shotgun in Mid Range Combat See in these scenarios they would yield poor statistics indicating a weapon to be underpowered, when in fact it is functioning properly when used as intended. Forge Gun vs infantry Plasma Cannon vs infantry This may make these weapons look overpowered to some even though they are not because they are intended to be used against vehicles.
Xocoyol Zaraoul Zumari Force Projection Caldari State 737	Posted - 2013.07.13 21:25:00 - [8] - Quote Master Jaraiya wrote: Xocoyol Zaraoul wrote: If Flaylocks were light weapons I think I would have less of a problem with them... An ofc that means I'd like them to use more CPU and PG. Uhm...Mass Driver. So then naturally nerf flaylock blast radius or something to bring it more in line with other light weapons, imo, not too much, just a smidge. The proto Scambler is really sweet but it still has shabby stats compared to flaylocks.
Sleepy Zan Sleepytime Gorilla Mercenaries 2436	Posted - 2013.07.13 21:25:00 - [9] - Quote Master Jaraiya wrote: Sleepy Zan wrote: Intended uses are irrelevant the only thing that matters are the possible uses. It is not necessarily irrelevant. If one were testing a weapon to see if it was over or under powered, and used it outside its intended use it would skew the results. For instance sniper rifle in midrange or cqc HMG in Long Range Combat Shotgun in Mid Range Combat See in these scenarios they would yield poor statistics indicating a weapon to be underpowered, when in fact it is functioning properly when used as intended. Forge Gun vs infantry Plasma Cannon vs infantry This may make these weapons look overpowered to some even though they are not because they are intended to be used against vehicles. You seem to only partially understand.
Master Jaraiya Ultramarine Corp 401	Posted - 2013.07.13 21:56:00 - [10] - Quote Sleepy Zan wrote: Intended uses are irrelevant the only thing that matters are the possible uses. Then, please, by all means, explain it to me.



Pages: 1 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online/DUST514, the EVE/DUST514 logo, EVE/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to OMG Labs to use EVE Online/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, OMG Labs. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.