|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Promethius Franklin
DUST University
Ivy League
54
   |
Posted - 2013.07.17 21:30:00 -
[1] - Quote
Buster Friently wrote:So, I assume you're good then with the AR usage being just a little bit more than the least used 10 out of 12 weapons combined? Why not? For a subset of players a full auto, AR like weapon will be a go to. As far as comparisons to the assault SR, I'd like to see your data probed deeper.
How many of those were militia, thus possibly indicating a starter fit?
Also how many are BPO rifles (toxin, dren, exile, etc)?
How many were less that the nearest direct comparison, the assault scrambler rifle in isk cost?
Unless the factors like starting weapons, BPO's and the lack of alternatives are addressed we won't see a change likely. These keep the AR strong in usage despite claims of performance inequalities. |
Promethius Franklin
DUST University
Ivy League
55
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 22:54:00 -
[2] - Quote
Buster Friently wrote:
This is all good, hypothetically. The reality doesn't support this, at least in pub matches. Even in PC data, the AR is only outused by the HMG, interestingly.
But I'm only asking if this matters, not why it's the case that AR usage is so out of the norm.
I'd say no, it doesn't. Remembering that other weapons excel situationally yet tend to suffer greatly outside of specialty and considering how frequently a frontliner may find themselves outside of that specialty, it's fair for a general purpose weapon to find a home in the hands of a large portion of the player base. |
Promethius Franklin
DUST University
Ivy League
55
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 23:02:00 -
[3] - Quote
Cosgar wrote:What weaknesses does the AR have compared to other weapons?
Which weapon? |
Promethius Franklin
DUST University
Ivy League
56
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 23:10:00 -
[4] - Quote
Cosgar wrote:Promethius Franklin wrote:Cosgar wrote:What weaknesses does the AR have compared to other weapons? Which weapon? Surprise me
Just limiting to other light weapons:
Can't outrage an sniper rifle, also doesn't have the per bullet damage potential for 1-2 hit kills
Don't have the ability to OHK or near OHK like a shotgun
MD has greater crowd control ability and slightly less line of sight reliance
ScR does better against shields which helps in the current Cal Logi proliferation, personally I seem to get better mid range accuracy with the SR as well. |
Promethius Franklin
DUST University
Ivy League
56
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 23:13:00 -
[5] - Quote
Sloth9230 wrote:Rogatien Merc wrote:Promethius Franklin wrote:Cosgar wrote:What weaknesses does the AR have compared to other weapons? Which weapon? - shotgun can OHKO with a wider reticle at close range. - sniper rifle, forge gun, laser rifle have obvious range advantage. - CFLP and mass drivers do increased damage to armor - nova knives can OHKO without giving opponent chance to react. - scrambler rifle offers ability to charge for high alpha headshots. - mass drivers are better at assist farming / lolareadenial All those weapons suck, even in their own niches, the AR might not be the best at anything, but it certainly is second best, and definitely not a true "jack of all trades, master of none" weapon, it simply isn't average enough for that. Oh, but this fine because they don't have the range of snipers 
I suppose when you are determined to let your preconceived bias override your reading comprehension that is the conclusion you would come to. |
Promethius Franklin
DUST University
Ivy League
56
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 23:18:00 -
[6] - Quote
Jaqen Morghalis wrote:Promethius Franklin wrote:Buster Friently wrote:
This is all good, hypothetically. The reality doesn't support this, at least in pub matches. Even in PC data, the AR is only outused by the HMG, interestingly.
But I'm only asking if this matters, not why it's the case that AR usage is so out of the norm.
I'd say no, it doesn't. Remembering that other weapons excel situationally yet tend to suffer greatly outside of specialty and considering how frequently a frontliner may find themselves outside of that specialty, it's fair for a general purpose weapon to find a home in the hands of a large portion of the player base. I believe it DOES matter, in that (tactically-speaking and in spite of what you see in pub matches, or which weapon is most used) a more diverse team, working together and playing to their strengths, will have an advantage over one that is not diverse, if only because they would be better equipped to deal with a wider variety if situations (sniping in open terrain, CQ weapons in CQC, for example), and respond more effectively against a wider variety of enemy tactics. The "general purpose" AR squad can still be effective, and might win some battles, but the more diverse team is more likely to win the war, IMO.
Keeping in mind that I haven't seen or perhaps overlooked whether the source data was compiled from instant battles, or other sources, I stand by my statement overall. There isn't in my opinion a strong enough draw for things outside of instant battles with alot more soloing and uncoordinated squads, thus more "do it all myself" types which screams for the general versatility of the AR. |
|
|
| |
|