DUST Search - Do Mass Drivers really need Six Shots?

Buster Friently wrote:

semperfi1999 wrote:

Buster Friently wrote:

semperfi1999 wrote:

Buster Friently wrote:

The AR kills as often as 11 of the available 14 weapons combined. Combined. It doesn't matter if it's OP or not, it's hurting diversity, and hurting the game.

Also, this logic really makes no sense regarding people using the AR. It seems people migrated to the Flaylock at ok speeds before it was nerfed. If the AR was not OP, people would stop using it and migrate to other weapons, but they aren't. The overusage is the problem regardless of whether or not it fits your interpretation of OP.

Actually the problem is your logical reasoning is flawed. You want there to be more diversity in the weapons people use. So in an attempt to obtain the diversity desired you wish to uber nerf a weapon that is infact balanced in an effort to force ppl from using this weapon to using a different weapon thereby increasing the "diversity". Only this is perhaps one of the most insanely idiotic reasonings for nerfing something that anyone could think of. A player should not be "forced" to not use the weapon they want to use just to increase the diversity of the weaponry in this game. Even if you do this then how can you make people spec differently...what if they all specced into ASCR? Then your have ASCR 514 (according to you) and you back to the exact same place you were before with a vast majority of the kills being done by 1 weapon because a vast majority of players have chosen to use that weapon.

Simply put you cannot/should not be able to force diversity in a game where you can choose the weapon you use. Like I said there are better weapons already on the market for people to use and many people despite knowing that there is a better weapon will continue to use the "inferior" weapon because they are familiar with it....or like it......or like the looks of it...(whatever reason they personally have). People migrated to the flaylock because it was OP...and some people follow that trend. However even with the flaylock being OP you still didnt see a majority of people using it because they chose not to. Heck I chose not to spec into the flaylock because I knew it was a noob weapon and I didnt want to use it for that reason (i also rarely if ever use sidearms). You cannot dictate other players person preferences. Heck eventually we are supposed to have 4 different models of assault rifles (1 for every race) and yet you will still probably see a majority if players stick with the original plasma rifles even when there are better options out there.

BTW I am a ASCR user....before that an AR user. I moved to the ASCR because I saw that it was better than the AR in every single way. But I dont have an issue with ppl using the AR because thats what they choose to use. Maybe I just dont understand the mentality that is behind your thought process of "the devs need to make sure that the weapons usage is diverse so they should nerf/buff weapons accordingly to create a diverse weapon environment". Perhaps its just my libertarian mind coming through that refuses to allow me to accept such a gross example of freedom of choice being taken from a player.

Yes you gamer who is good at using sniper rifles...CCP has now designated you as a shotgunner...as such you can only use the shotgun now because we must maintain a diverse weapon usage and we see that there are just too many sniper rifles in use as such your name has come up as one of the players who will now be using the shotgun exclusively. Have a nice day

Hell, I would take buffing the other weapons, or even not nerfing them in to the ground. The AR nerf brigade won't have that though, so the only thing left is to bring the AR down to the level of the rest of the weapons.

Sigh......yes because the ASCR isnt better than the AR..... Roll

I swear debating with a wall is better than debating you...and least it gives intelligent replies in the echoes.......

The AR has no downsides really. That's the problem. Also, it is too good even against niche weapons that should beat it handily. This really isn't debatable, and the numbers show this. Of course we should expect more users to use ARs than other weapons due to comfort, but, the AR is used to kill nearly as much as 11 of the available 14 weapons combined. They're also used to kill 10 times more often than the Scrambler rifles. This overuse is ridiculous, and CCP most certainly can force use - just like they did with the Flaylocks.


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
MlDDLE MANGEMENT lMPurity 248	Posted - 2013.07.31 04:30:00 - [1] - Quote Zatara Rought wrote: Just wondering, whats the furthest range you can fling a mass driver round from say on top of the buildings at delta and echo on the bridge maps? Cause they don't seem to be affected by falloff damage the way ar's are, to the guy who says regnum uses flaylock, lol! He uses smg's you nerd. To the guys talking stats...are you adding in the 130% to armor? The m/d and flux combo is ludicrous because the falloff shield damage is virtually nonexistant at proto levels so you don't have to be remotely accurate to kill with it, just close. So I think it needs a nerf, not sure. Does it suck to get hit by a guy from up top and not have any way of getting away from it because cover doesn't work unless you get underneath something or find cover large enough not to get hit by splash? Oh yeah did I mention his window of vulnerability while shooting that thing is extremely small because you have no charge time? It's pretty annoying. Forge gunning from god knows where in a pub match when your in a squad of .5-5mill sp players aren't likely to figure out how to counterplay the forger, as the range and the fact it's av is just lolz. The fact it takes a heavy suit with at least 900 ehp to use the thing...is even more frustrating. I spent one game recently spending the whole match trying to counter play 2 forge gunners who managed to get up top on the Towers map. It's frustrating. MD's can be suppressed long enough with a TAC AR or Imperial SCR. to get up to them by a teammate. MD's function as force multipliers on the field and inherently don't have a 1v1 solution to them. Thats kind of the point of tactical shooters not everything has a 1:1 solution nor should it. For arena battles in small map small number situations fine there is a point to be made. But in 16 v16 HTFU and come up with counters. I hear squashing a MD with a Dropship is quite effective too. With regards to their CQC efficacy i think a minimum timer or minimum distance travelled for explosion might make them less devastating because in CQC they do exceedingly well and are very easy to use. Fact is they are balanced IMO opinion in their suppression role and playstyle at range and heights. But in CQC the 6 shots and huge splash damage can really be overpowering even against shotguns and HMGs. For those that would say FF and such its really not difficult to stay out of the splash damage and utterly decimate. Also the shallower arc and faster travel time of the rounds themselves make them impossible to avoid in CQC. There is a reason the MD is the preferred weapon within city structures over Shotguns.
MlDDLE MANGEMENT lMPurity 251	Posted - 2013.07.31 18:11:00 - [2] - Quote Buster Friently wrote: semperfi1999 wrote: Buster Friently wrote: semperfi1999 wrote: Buster Friently wrote: The AR kills as often as 11 of the available 14 weapons combined. Combined. It doesn't matter if it's OP or not, it's hurting diversity, and hurting the game. Also, this logic really makes no sense regarding people using the AR. It seems people migrated to the Flaylock at ok speeds before it was nerfed. If the AR was not OP, people would stop using it and migrate to other weapons, but they aren't. The overusage is the problem regardless of whether or not it fits your interpretation of OP. Actually the problem is your logical reasoning is flawed. You want there to be more diversity in the weapons people use. So in an attempt to obtain the diversity desired you wish to uber nerf a weapon that is infact balanced in an effort to force ppl from using this weapon to using a different weapon thereby increasing the "diversity". Only this is perhaps one of the most insanely idiotic reasonings for nerfing something that anyone could think of. A player should not be "forced" to not use the weapon they want to use just to increase the diversity of the weaponry in this game. Even if you do this then how can you make people spec differently...what if they all specced into ASCR? Then your have ASCR 514 (according to you) and you back to the exact same place you were before with a vast majority of the kills being done by 1 weapon because a vast majority of players have chosen to use that weapon. Simply put you cannot/should not be able to force diversity in a game where you can choose the weapon you use. Like I said there are better weapons already on the market for people to use and many people despite knowing that there is a better weapon will continue to use the "inferior" weapon because they are familiar with it....or like it......or like the looks of it...(whatever reason they personally have). People migrated to the flaylock because it was OP...and some people follow that trend. However even with the flaylock being OP you still didnt see a majority of people using it because they chose not to. Heck I chose not to spec into the flaylock because I knew it was a noob weapon and I didnt want to use it for that reason (i also rarely if ever use sidearms). You cannot dictate other players person preferences. Heck eventually we are supposed to have 4 different models of assault rifles (1 for every race) and yet you will still probably see a majority if players stick with the original plasma rifles even when there are better options out there. BTW I am a ASCR user....before that an AR user. I moved to the ASCR because I saw that it was better than the AR in every single way. But I dont have an issue with ppl using the AR because thats what they choose to use. Maybe I just dont understand the mentality that is behind your thought process of "the devs need to make sure that the weapons usage is diverse so they should nerf/buff weapons accordingly to create a diverse weapon environment". Perhaps its just my libertarian mind coming through that refuses to allow me to accept such a gross example of freedom of choice being taken from a player. Yes you gamer who is good at using sniper rifles...CCP has now designated you as a shotgunner...as such you can only use the shotgun now because we must maintain a diverse weapon usage and we see that there are just too many sniper rifles in use as such your name has come up as one of the players who will now be using the shotgun exclusively. Have a nice day Hell, I would take buffing the other weapons, or even not nerfing them in to the ground. The AR nerf brigade won't have that though, so the only thing left is to bring the AR down to the level of the rest of the weapons. Sigh......yes because the ASCR isnt better than the AR..... I swear debating with a wall is better than debating you...and least it gives intelligent replies in the echoes....... The AR has no downsides really. That's the problem. Also, it is too good even against niche weapons that should beat it handily. This really isn't debatable, and the numbers show this. Of course we should expect more users to use ARs than other weapons due to comfort, but, the AR is used to kill nearly as much as 11 of the available 14 weapons combined. They're also used to kill 10 times more often than the Scrambler rifles. This overuse is ridiculous, and CCP most certainly can force use - just like they did with the Flaylocks. What numbers you asshat, are you citing your scrubby pubdata to me again. Please come back when you actually know how to gather legitimate data, till then take your pseudoscience and poor methodology back to community college where it belongs.
MlDDLE MANGEMENT lMPurity 253	Posted - 2013.07.31 18:36:00 - [3] - Quote Well what he cant provide is a proportionality rate either. He cite AR's have the most kills on a killboard but also cites its the most commonly used weapon. Hmm I wonder why? Also will he complain when new rifle variants are added? All of which people will migrate to as they will be increasing in range. Combat rifle especially. Nope all he can cite is the is a larger portion of AR use over other weapons. Well seeing as most other weapons are niches and situational I would expect that. How about Assualt classes what the proportionality of Assualt and Logi compared to Heavy and Scout? Wouldnt that serve as a factor? After all does anyone expect there to be a wider use of SMG or Scrambler Pistols over Rifles? Lazer rifles are niche, the only weapon that is on par with the AR is the SCR and those who know how to build a SCR build would chose an SCR over AR anyday except most dont know how to keep the range to their advantage. Now add to this that both of these rifle fall more into a carbine category then true rifle and you will see a spike in rifle gear. Also it just might have to do with the fact that the only 2 BPO's are the SMG and the AR currently. Lastly the spike data in Flaylocks shows the increased efficacy of the weapon itself. For all his bluster about the OPness of the AR sure doesnt seem to provide any insight into the efficiency of the weapon compared to other weapons. Let me give you a clue with a normalization to account for usage your entire analysis is invalid.