look at every other FPS, do your AR's in those have 60 in a clip, i think not, the huge ammo mag turns the AR into a HMG when used by an accurate gamer, its wrong, clips for the normal AR's need to 30 or less for the standard AR, GEK-38 and Duvolle, maybe 25 in the breach variants, just sort it out CCP, 60 bullets @ 30 hp each =,1800 so with an AR i can kill any infantry in the game IN ONE CLIP??? seriously thats just wrong , same with SMG's, potentially 1400 hp in a clip, MADNESS!!!!!!!!

Show me numbers? Or go and play on both? Because I have, and the ASCR is much harder to maintain via recoil. This may be do to the increased zoom on the ASCR scope in relation to the iron sites of the Duvolle, but no, I disagree flatly unless you have stats on the weapons themselves to prove to me otherwise.

And again, 2 dmg per shot may not seem like much, but look at the rate of fire, and the overheating aspect, why then choose the ASCR over the duvolle.

The point being there needs to be some drawback from the duvolle if you want to see other weapons being used. Currently there isn't, and using anything else artificially handicaps you for no reason.



FTFY.

I used the AR exclusively until the most recent respec...then I used the scrambler. I am confident that I know what I am talking about after months of AR use and a couple months of ASCR use under my belt.....but you want the numbers....not sure why you cant compare this yourself but here it is.

Carthum Assault Scrambler Rifle 9 Prototype 77280isk
39.6 HP
705.9 RPM
58.2 accuracy
72 mag size
325 max ammo
2.5 s reload
15 heat buildup per second (equates to 1.5 mags before overheating)
9.0 s Cool down
5.0 s overheat
50 HP dmg from overheating
83 CPU
15 PG

Duvolle Assault Rifle 8 Prototype
37.4 dmg
750 rpm
56.8 accuracy
60 mag size
300 max ammo
3 reload
90 CPU
13 PG

ASCR
Pros: Higher per shot dmg, better accuracy, higher mag size, more max ammo, faster reload time, less CPU, recoil/disperion same as fully skilled AR, better sight, bonus 20% dmg against shields which 90% of the playerbase tank

Cons: slightly lower DPS from the AR (465.89 DPS for the ASCR vs 467.50 for the AR), slightly lower RPM (but as DPS shows the extra dmg makes up the difference quite nicely), can overheat (but only after 1.5 mags which if you havent killed someone by that time then your dead whether you use the ASCR, AR, or any other weapon), 80% dmg to armor (difference of 2 dmg per shot from the AR)


AR
Pros: higher RPM (once again this means a 2 dmg difference per second from the ASCR not exactly amazing), no possible way to overheat, less PG, 90% dmg to armor

Cons: Lower per shot dmg, lower accuracy, lower mag size, less max ammo, slower reload time, more CPU, must spend 1.5 mill extra SP to obtain same recoil/dispersion that ASCR starts with, iron sight (although better still not as good as the RDS on the ASCR),10% bonus to shield dmg

Now the only thing that cannot be quantified is whether the hip fire on the AR is slightly better than the ASCR or not. I have tried both and honestly its hard to tell but if I was forced to give this to one of the guns I would probably lean a little more towards the AR having a slight advantage in hipfire....but its only a very slight advantage.

As you can see from the stats the ASCR in general comes out ahead of the AR every single time. Yes there are some things the AR is better at I would never debate that. But even in the areas where the AR is better the difference is pretty small......nigh insignificant since everyone misses some shots so noone truly sees that DPS on an enemy. But the areas where the ASCR is better than the AR the difference can be very significant. Total possible dmg from the AR before reload is 2244 but the ASCR is 2851.2....that is a difference of over 600 dmg before reloading....that is possibly another kill. Reload is .5 seconds faster for the ASCR.....the CPU/PG just depends on your suit if you can take more CPU or more PG....so thats not really a defining issue between the weapons as it depends on your specific build. Any place where the ASCR has less dmg it is lower dmg by 2 points...but where the dmg is greater for the ASCR its a difference of 6.38 (using base info not counting any proficiencies so this difference becomes larger as proficiencies are included). The only significant supposed downside for the ASCR is that it can overheat but seriously who has ever overheated the ASCR on accident? Its almost impossible to do on accident. Also the AR downside is as it fires continuously the recoil/dispersion becomes greater and greater.

Honestly if you cant admit that the ASCR is a better weapon (maybe not your preference but just based on stats) then you just blind. The ASCR is the better assault than the assault rifle is (which is supposed to be the gallente version of the weapon LOL).

some very valid points.

lol what?

The AR has NEVER been nerfed.

Here's the STD AR stats through out the prior builds.

Precursor- DMG:31, ACR:56.2, ROF:750

Codex- DMG:31, ACR:56.2, ROF:750

Chromosome- DMG:31, ACR:56.2, ROF:750

Uprising 1.0- DMG:31, ACR:56.2, ROF:750

Post Uprising 1.0- DMG:34, ACR:56.2, ROF:750

As you can see, the AR has never been nerfed, in fact, its been buffed recently!

Your majority of the post is null as heavies are more likely to die from things like tanks, while scouts die from a stiff breeze, your own deaths do not represent the majority of the player base, which is what validates my point as I took my point from the general kill boards, not my own deaths.

Its balance since the TACAR is a better version of the Scrambler rifle Maybe they should switch the two.

Your an idiot...yes the AR was nerfed (and rightly so for some of it). AR was nerfed from Codex to chromosome (i believe that is the right build...its the build right before the open beta). In Codex the AR has 0 recoil/dispersion....this was corrected in chromosome as this caused the AR to be OP. However they also put in a horrible HORRIBLE iron sight that is the worst iron sight I have ever had to play with. Literally in order to shoot someone you had to cover the enemy with your sight....not put the top of the post on the enemy this is not where the shots went...in order to hit someones head you had to literally cover their head with the sight instead of placing their head on top of the middle post of the sight (which is how iron sights are supposed to work). If CCP had added the iron sight the ARs now have there would have never been an outcry from AR users that CCP completely screwed up the AR. So yes the AR has been nerfed....and in fact it was overnerfed as the sight was horrible for months and AR users just had to get used to using a horrible sight.

The AR was also nerfed, in terms of range, with Uprising, but all weapons were nerfed then, so it doesn't really count.


Despite the iron sights issue, we still have, in pub matches, the vast majority of kills being performed by the AR. It's killing diversity. You'll note that in the OP, I mention the overuse is the problem whether or not we choose to label the AR as OP. I understand the reluctance of the AR users to label, or even admit, that they're pride and joy is OP. I think it is, but above and beyond that argument, the weapon has removed most of the diversity in handheld weapons from Dust simply by representing almost the equivalent number of kills as 11 of the 14 weapons.

That's a massive problem and the most expeditious way of correcting it is to make the AR less desirable.

Your argument is invalid against me...I am not an AR user but an ASCR user. It would benefit me for the AR to be nerfed because then I would destroy AR users easier than I do now. Once again you are arguing from the wrong position. If you want to argue this point you have to bring attention to the fact that the game pretty much forces everyone to use the AR exclusively for the first month or so of playing. You need to go to CCP and tell them they need to give options of starter fits with all types of weapons not just the AR.


That being said you may not ever actually achieve the "diversity" you are wanting even if you nerf the AR. Lets say you make the AR worthless in an attempt to force ppl into other weapons to create more "diversity". New players are forced to use AR...with its being worthless the majority of new players would quit before even trying to understand the game. Alot of AR only players will simply leave and no longer play the game. A small number of players will start to spec into different weapons....and another number of players will just continue to use the AR anyway. In the end the ONLY thing you have done is lower the number of ppl playing this game....and you cannot even guarantee that the weapon kills will diversify anyway.

As I have stated before you are going about this the wrong way. You are making illogical arguments and backing those arguments with fallacies in your arguments and bad data gathering techiniques....including assuming correlation = causation (which if you really are a scientist as you say then you know this is not true). If you want to make this argument petition CCP to give more starter fit options for ppl to get to use different weapons when they first start playing the game. Heck if you made this type of petition I would even sign it because its TRUE and CCP should do something about this. But that still doesnt mean you can force diversity in weaponry usage. Next your going to argue that X racial suit is overused and should be nerfed so that you see a greater diversity in suits used in battle.........

basically, the ratios of AR users to other weapons right now is very high. the proper ratio is supposed to be 50/50. namely, 50% of people should be using ARs or less, and 50% or more should be using other weapons (not including AV, save forguns).'

Ideally a 40%-60% ratio is desirable because specialty weapons will be used by the majority of players and so every squad in a match will have a diverse load out where as tankers, pilots, LAV specialists, and dedicated AR users will be the only people really using them (by dedicated i mean all 10million SP in assault suits, and ARs. to be a dedicated AR user you must be good with every AR, breach, tac burst, etc. there is at least variatiion in the Ar used). All other weapon types will be fitted to every other type of individual based on their playstyle.

currently this ratio is more of a 70 or 75% to a respective 30 or 25%. i see very few people using lasers, scrambler rilfes (i mean actual scrambler rilfes and not Ascr). shotguns i only see proto (but i have noticed a few ppl using milita shotguns and light suits, most of their names i recognize as experienced players who specced into shotguns), all the HMGs i see are proto level, and even at that they dnt fair well, MD have to ADV or PROTO to be effective... these weapons simply aren't as effecient, even in their Area of expertise vs an AR.

AScr are useless compared to regular ARs. they are only decent at best in close range. between the muzzle flash and horrible range only dedicated Scr users and amarians use it. these same individuals with an AR in hand would completel devastate.


you don't need to be a scientist to use logic. you don't need to be a scientist to see an end result. if i see a car crash, logic dictates that the car had crashed, to think otherwise is crazy would you not agree? well, i see nothing but ARs on the kill feed, so logic dictates that ARs are get most of those or rather most of those players died as a direct result of an AR. therefore, if 70% or greater of the kills in a game as diverse as dust are coming from 1 gun, chances are its OP, or inversely everything else is UP. jus sayin

also, he isnt trying to FORCE weapon diversity, but SUGGEST it. kinda like with the flaylocks (which in fact were never OP) which after the nerf diversified the secondary weapon category, its only logical to assume the same wold result with primaries.

So let me get this straight: You took data from 4 skirmish games you played on a single day and you really think this data is as accurate as CCPs data, which is from every single Dust-game ever played? Nice try, yeah, but I can't take data like that seriously.

Do this for maybe 100 matches a day and over a time of at least one month (due to the patch rhythm). Then we talk.

Here :

https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=92678

And here :

https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=94246

Oh really?


Click the second link.

That's thirty matches worth of data.

Plus Mcbob's 4 matches.

34 Matches.

That's more matches then what every other weapon in the game was smothered into paste by.

Just so you know.

Thats the data.

Your an idiot...yes the AR was nerfed

I will not resort to spits and name-calling.

Next game, go into the MCC.

Now shoot at the wall in ADS.

See your crosshair move?

No?

Just wait until half the Mag is gone.

Now just stop shooting.

Now start again.

Hey! The recoil is gone!

See the issue?

No Recoil until half the magazine is shot continuously, Long Effective Range, Broken SGs, Wimp HMGs, all combine to make the one gun that can get 1100 kills in 30 matches.

So, no. The Recoil/Kick Buff obviously isn't working.

Cut Mag size to 45.

Increase Rate of falloff, i.e. decrease effective (In the ingame mechanics terminology) range.

There.

I will not resort to spits and name-calling.

Next game, go into the MCC.

Now shoot at the wall in ADS.

See your crosshair move?

No?

Just wait until half the Mag is gone.

Now just stop shooting.

Now start again.

Hey! The recoil is gone!

See the issue?

No Recoil until half the magazine is shot continuously, Long Effective Range, Broken SGs, Wimp HMGs, all combine to make the one gun that can get 1100 kills in 30 matches.

So, no. The Recoil/Kick Buff obviously isn't working.

Cut Mag size to 45.

Increase Rate of falloff, i.e. decrease effective (In the ingame mechanics terminology) range.

There.

keep it simple... cut mag to 40... thats all

You'd do better with the AR.

Like I said, there are people that don't use the AR, but it's not because the AR isn't the best gun in the game.

I will not resort to spits and name-calling.

Next game, go into the MCC.

Now shoot at the wall in ADS.

See your crosshair move?

No?

Just wait until half the Mag is gone.

Now just stop shooting.

Now start again.

Hey! The recoil is gone!

See the issue?

No Recoil until half the magazine is shot continuously, Long Effective Range, Broken SGs, Wimp HMGs, all combine to make the one gun that can get 1100 kills in 30 matches.

So, no. The Recoil/Kick Buff obviously isn't working.

Cut Mag size to 45.

Increase Rate of falloff, i.e. decrease effective (In the ingame mechanics terminology) range.

There.

Your thoughts are interesting I will give you that but the 40 round mag......well that would work if you also lowered the reload time. With a high reload time on the AR (and with the hit detection issues) it takes about 30-40 rounds for 1 kill alot of times....not always but alot of the times it does. I would be hard pressed to reduce their mag size and not give them at least a slightly faster reload time.

3-3.25 Seconds sound good?

What is this, like your 14th nerf AR thread with no real data aside from "omgz AR so popler"

create opinion.

What is this, like your 14th nerf AR thread with no real data aside from "omgz AR so popler"

We have a winner.

The AR is currently way too desirable. Nerf is needed.

Ok just think for a second, in war real war. What weapon is usually used most on the field?

Why? it's easy to use, and accessible=Cheap.


Again, Militia and GEK need a look. Nothing else, if anything Breach needs a buff in some sort of way.

So, every other weapon in this game gets nerfed just as soon as the AR nerf brigade gets going.

OP or Not, the AR is ruining Dust. This weapon is so overused it's just stupid. The weapon, in pubs, accounts for as many kills as 11 of the 14 weapons combined. Combined.

Does that sound like balance or diversity? no, it isn't.

CCP - Are other weapons supposed to compete with the AR? They aren't.

It's about damn time that CCP approaches balance with, you know, usage balance in mind.