DUST Search - 3 Primary Weapon Types: Would you agree?

Beren Hurin wrote:

Vyzion Eyri wrote:

If weapon customisation reaches the point I'd like to see it at, these distinct roles would blur and you'd see things in between and totally unique.

We can apply weapons to current trends though, and realise that some already fall into more than one category.

For example, the forge gun being used to kill infantry.

So the AV category is kind of a sub-category of the indirect, niche group.

Then weapons like the flaylock. They're definitely reliable, and used often enough that you could say that with current maps and how CQC plays out, that you could even say they're versatile.

I've heard about cases where it's used as a primary, in fact. So do these fall in category 1) or 4)?

Yeah. Some of them blend together in their roles. The thing I don't get about flaylock is that when you are shooting something as large as a mini missile from your gun that's a lot of mass so IMO the kickback should be even worse than the mass driver...that's another story though.

Yeah I guess you could draw a T with support to direct damage on the x axis and anti infantry on one end of the y axis and vehicles on the other end.

Pages: [1] :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Beren Hurin OMNI Endeavors 668	Posted - 2013.07.13 23:12:00 - [1] - Quote It seems like there are 3-4 weapon types depending on how you count them. I call them: 1) Direct- reliable/versitile high RoF and accuracy (basically assault rifles) 2) Stand-off/indirect- mostly situational and niche. Not as versitile as direct damage weapons, but more deadly in their prime roles. 3) AV- self-described 4) Sidearm- backup weapon for the most part.
ladwar Dead Six Initiative Lokun Listamenn 846	Posted - 2013.07.13 23:14:00 - [2] - Quote thats 4 and 4th doesn't fit in DUST so HTFU. and 2 you mean support not indirect or stand-off.
Beren Hurin OMNI Endeavors 668	Posted - 2013.07.13 23:17:00 - [3] - Quote ladwar wrote: thats 4 and 4th doesn't fit in DUST so HTFU. and 2 you mean support not indirect or stand-off. Quick on the draw there with the HTFU buddy. This wasn't a complaint as much as a "don't expect direct and support/indirect weapons to do the same damage in all circumstances" When people are asking for weapons balances, I just think people shouldn't expect DPS to be equal for everything. And weapon role is the reason.
FreeMason2 Fraternity of St. Venefice Amarr Empire 1	Posted - 2013.07.14 02:38:00 - [4] - Quote Ladwar seems to be really devoted to the term HTFU. Amazing community here. Very informatitive.
Galvan Nized Deep Space Republic Top Men. 98	Posted - 2013.07.14 02:43:00 - [5] - Quote CCP defines 4 as well: plasma, projectile, railgun, explosive.
Vyzion Eyri The Southern Legion RISE of LEGION 936	Posted - 2013.07.14 02:46:00 - [6] - Quote If weapon customisation reaches the point I'd like to see it at, these distinct roles would blur and you'd see things in between and totally unique. We can apply weapons to current trends though, and realise that some already fall into more than one category. For example, the forge gun being used to kill infantry. So the AV category is kind of a sub-category of the indirect, niche group. Then weapons like the flaylock. They're definitely reliable, and used often enough that you could say that with current maps and how CQC plays out, that you could even say they're versatile. I've heard about cases where it's used as a primary, in fact. So do these fall in category 1) or 4)?
Aero Yassavi PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 447	Posted - 2013.07.14 02:49:00 - [7] - Quote Galvan Nized wrote: CCP defines 4 as well: plasma, projectile, railgun, explosive. Actually it's Hybrid, Laser, Projectile, and Explosive. Within Hybrid you have two subsets, plasma and railgun, and within laser you have two subsets as well, pulse and beam. Just to be nitpicky https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=77447
Beren Hurin OMNI Endeavors 668	Posted - 2013.07.14 02:52:00 - [8] - Quote Vyzion Eyri wrote: If weapon customisation reaches the point I'd like to see it at, these distinct roles would blur and you'd see things in between and totally unique. We can apply weapons to current trends though, and realise that some already fall into more than one category. For example, the forge gun being used to kill infantry. So the AV category is kind of a sub-category of the indirect, niche group. Then weapons like the flaylock. They're definitely reliable, and used often enough that you could say that with current maps and how CQC plays out, that you could even say they're versatile. I've heard about cases where it's used as a primary, in fact. So do these fall in category 1) or 4)? Yeah. Some of them blend together in their roles. The thing I don't get about flaylock is that when you are shooting something as large as a mini missile from your gun that's a lot of mass so IMO the kickback should be even worse than the mass driver...that's another story though. Yeah I guess you could draw a T with support to direct damage on the x axis and anti infantry on one end of the y axis and vehicles on the other end.
SERPENT-Adamapple Royal Uhlans Amarr Empire 117	Posted - 2013.07.14 03:20:00 - [9] - Quote Galvan Nized wrote: CCP defines 4 as well: plasma, projectile, railgun, explosive. Forgot Laser
Echoist Fenrir's Wolves RUST415 32	Posted - 2013.07.14 03:23:00 - [10] - Quote Beren Hurin wrote: Vyzion Eyri wrote: If weapon customisation reaches the point I'd like to see it at, these distinct roles would blur and you'd see things in between and totally unique. We can apply weapons to current trends though, and realise that some already fall into more than one category. For example, the forge gun being used to kill infantry. So the AV category is kind of a sub-category of the indirect, niche group. Then weapons like the flaylock. They're definitely reliable, and used often enough that you could say that with current maps and how CQC plays out, that you could even say they're versatile. I've heard about cases where it's used as a primary, in fact. So do these fall in category 1) or 4)? Yeah. Some of them blend together in their roles. The thing I don't get about flaylock is that when you are shooting something as large as a mini missile from your gun that's a lot of mass so IMO the kickback should be even worse than the mass driver...that's another story though. Yeah I guess you could draw a T with support to direct damage on the x axis and anti infantry on one end of the y axis and vehicles on the other end. Actually it would make sense that the flaylock had no recoil or very little because if you look at the Gyrojet pistol (real gun) it has little kickback but the draw back is that the rocket up close couldn't kill someone because it doesn't have enough room to speed up. Maybe CCP should consider this when "tweaking" the flaylock. Just my opinion though.

Sammy677 Forty-Nine Fedayeen Minmatar Republic 7	Posted - 2013.07.14 21:58:00 - [11] - Quote I agree
ZeHealingHurts HurtingHeals Seituoda Taskforce Command Caldari State 284	Posted - 2013.07.14 22:24:00 - [12] - Quote 1. Assault Rifles 2. Flaylocks 3. AV nades 4. Everything else Or so i've heard. Forums are quite vocal about such things.


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