People use the AR because it is familiar. Not OP. if it was op nobody would use the scrambler rifle.

People use the AR because it is familiar. Not OP. if it was op nobody would use the scrambler rifle.

Here's the kill board from a skirmish map.

ARs-117
ScR-7

Seems nobody uses the ScR.

Facerape the AR with the balance bat in, 3, 2, ,1...

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.

'Cept CCP can't do that it's AR 514 afterall.

lol let me show the power of my Proto SCR and ASCR

Of course the AR is popular. It's easy to use, reliable, and many players will choose to invest SP in it before considering a second weapon to skill into simply because of its simplicity and familiarity. You said it yourself, you're complaining about overuse and not imbalance. From my perspective, you're also wildly exaggerating.

Expecting every gun to be represented equally among the player base is pretty ridiculous. If I ran a poll of everyone's favorite ice cream, animal, cartoon show, book, superhero, whatever, not one of these would receive equal representation throughout. Why should random chance or even balanced weaponry somehow result in balanced diversity in weapon usage?

Less than half of my deaths have been the result of lone AR fire. Hell, if I'm going to escape from any fire fight, it will be vs an AR at mid range. I'm just as likely to be under fire from scrambler rifles and in my experience someone in my LOS is probably holding a mass driver or a flaylock. Snipers are abundant. Scouts usually have a shotgun, smg, and/or flaylock. Heavies are obviously likely to be carrying HMGs or forge guns. I don't see plasma cannons, maybe one a day and that guy's probably just trying it out. Don't see many lasers. I see them, but not many.

Can't they just subtly buff all the other weapons instead?

The blood and tears have soaked the Nerf Bat through and through. It is well past the time to lock it in a gun safe.

Yup but, that isn't gonna happen....

(ARs are useless against tanks), become a better player (so you can kill people before they kill you)

You never know.

Lies.... A.R.s are very effective against a tanker.

I have to agree with some people needing to be better players. Period.

I fail to see how an AR is effective against a tank? I was referring to the tank itself as opposed to the squishy little dude inside who has no SP in infantry-based skills. The only time a good tanker should be out of their tank is when they spawn in at the start the match!

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.

I think there are two major "problems" with the ar.

1. It is in the starter fits so anybody gets free ones therefore anybody knows how to use them and skilling into them is a rather smart move if you want to use your free starter gear for a while.

2. Mimic weapons. The exsitence of these makes it praqctically unnecessary to skill into other weapons.


Solution to 1: bring in all racial variants and alter the starter fits with the racial assaultrifles

Solution to 2: get rid of the mimic weapons or move them into seperate skilltrees and gave every Assault rifle thier niche

Also I believe point one is the more important one...

Sad thing about that is that it isn't gonna happen for a long while if ever....

(at) Meeko Fent

From yesterday my deaths was like:

10 Sniper rifle
7 SR
5-6 TANK/blaster
5 LAV-bump
5 AR
4 OB
2 RAIL/Instalation
2 LASER
2 MD
1 HMG

NERF SNIPERS!!! TANKS! OB!! (joke) .... wait where are AR? No flylock ?

1. AR was nerfed enough.
2. Looking at all (yours list) I will be sugest nerf rocks... there are plenty of it... and I cant climb on them.

Just leave the damn A.R.s alone; stop nerfing ****.

CCP needs to sorely BUFF the other weapons.

Funny how AR users want everything nerfed, but when the mob brings pitchforks and torches to their doors, they want equality.

i normally use shotguns, md, flays and my knives to mess around but when it comes down to make some isk i switch back to my gek...easy kills, the ar-nerfs didn't change much

Ha, yeah ... this is pretty much what I do, too.

And it cracks me up when all these people rage about 'noob tubes' ... in my experience, the AR is the easiest thing to use in this game.

By a mile.

Terrain glitches... heh, nerf the rocks!

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.

Of course the AR is popular. It's easy to use, reliable, and many players will choose to invest SP in it before considering a second weapon to skill into simply because of its simplicity and familiarity. You said it yourself, you're complaining about overuse and not imbalance. From my perspective, you're also wildly exaggerating.

Expecting every gun to be represented equally among the player base is pretty ridiculous. If I ran a poll of everyone's favorite ice cream, animal, cartoon show, book, superhero, whatever, not one of these would receive equal representation throughout. Why should random chance or even balanced weaponry somehow result in balanced diversity in weapon usage?

I think you'll find so many AR kills because the AR is the most widely used weapon. Why is it widely used? Because that is what the AR is designed for, lots of people run assault and, strangely enough, the ASSAULT RIFLE is useful for assault players. Who would have thought it?

The AR is the mainstay of any army, real or in games. Do you see the World Powers banning the AR because too many people use it in battle? NO!

Dust is a FPS and like every other FPS game in History the AR or some variant of it is going to feature widely in it. If you die a lot from getting shot by ARs I would say become a sniper (you'll be out of range), become a tanker (ARs are useless against tanks), become a better player (so you can kill people before they kill you) or most preferably, go play Skyrim (they have no ARs and then we wouldn't have to listen to your crap)

OP, I value your opinion, because you're a niche player like myself.
AR Spam is natural and expected, this goes all the way back to Counter Strike, even Quake.

The AR is everyone's basic starter utility weapon.
The scrambler rifle is my new utility weapon of choice, however. Learn to manage the heat, and it'll facerape ARs all day long.

When the other utility weapons come out, I believe CCP will change the racial starter fits to use that race's utility weapon.
Only Gallente will start with the AR, Amarr will start with the SCR, and so on. Then you'll see the systemic balance you desire.

Be nice if we had access to weapon variants at Standard level again.
STD Assault Scrambler Rifle, STD Tactical Assault Rifle, etc.

(at) Meeko Fent

From yesterday my deaths was like:

10 Sniper rifle
7 SR
5-6 TANK/blaster
5 LAV-bump
5 AR
4 OB
2 RAIL/Instalation
2 LASER
2 MD
1 HMG

NERF SNIPERS!!! TANKS! OB!! (joke) .... wait where are AR? No flylock ?

1. AR was nerfed enough.
2. Looking at all (yours list) I will be sugest nerf rocks... there are plenty of it... and I cant climb on them.

I think you'll find so many AR kills because the AR is the most widely used weapon. Why is it widely used? Because that is what the AR is designed for, lots of people run assault and, strangely enough, the ASSAULT RIFLE is useful for assault players. Who would have thought it?

The AR is the mainstay of any army, real or in games. Do you see the World Powers banning the AR because too many people use it in battle? NO!

The ARs aren't OP they are just the baseline weapon in this game and every other FPS in the universe. After the TAC nerf you don't see any bull$hit kills like you did with the flaylock.

A rapid-fire weapon that throws small high speed projectiles is just the most practical and adaptable weapon on the battlefield. They are meant to be the go to choice when you are facing a broad range of situations where you need a weapon that is versatile. Decent but not exceptional range, good ammo capacity, ability to burst and spray, etc.

They aren't meant to be the master of all and the specialist weapons in Dust are often underpowered or fail to shine in their area of expertise. For example, the laser rifle is insufficiently good at long range to offset its lack of versatility. This however is not the fault of the AR, its just that those other weapons aren't developed enough.

The reason you see lots of AR kills is not because it is OP but because players have made the choice to go for familiarity and versatility at the cost of range/AE/whatever.

Even if every other weapon was significantly buffed people would still use the AR because it is versatile.

/rage
So, whenever it comes to nerfing any other gun, no matter if it was OP or not, the ARs spam the forums, and get it nerfed into to bowels of weapon hell, but nobody look at the AR....

The gun makes other guns obsolete!

Why use the SMG when you can use the AR and get comparable results with 4 times the range?

When heavies start dropping the HMG for the AR, there's a problem!

When CCP adapts game design of suits for its use, there's a problem!

Don't you think?!

/end rage

actually. i agree with him. put HMGs back to where they were in chromosome with the same range, and the current damage. make lasers like they were in chromosome. put flaylocks damage back to where it was (the splash radius can stay the same. just use standard and then ull get used to the smaller radius), put shotguns where they were in chromosome, put MD back to where they were in chrmomosome.

then we will see who has the last laugh

CCP would probably try to nerf the rock before they would think about touching the AR. They're probably afraid of they ARs screeching they will make on the forums.

This is untrue on almost every level.

First off, the AR is not the most widely used weapon in a lot of FPS games. Mostly older ones though.

Second, the AR is not used by western militaries because it is a bullet hose, like in Dust. It's used because it has accurate fire at fighting ranges, and can be put in full auto in emergencies, but modern warfighters are trained to fire short bursts almost all the time.

Also, the AR carries far too many rounds if you want to compare to real world weapons. (and other weapons in Dust)

Also, the argument here is that the AR, as seen in Dust, amounts to kills equivalent to 11 of the 14 available weapons in game. That kind of overuse is killing diversity in Dust, and ruining the game. It doesn't matter why it's so overused, only that it needs to be fixed.

Part of the reason AR seems OP is because folks have skilled heavily into it because the other weapons get nerfed/changed so much but the AR stays pretty constant. Also, every suit can use the thing so why not?

If you skill the other weapons into lvl 5 profeciency, they are just as effective and deadly, difference is that they typically require a different play style than the run and gun most FPS players are used to.

COD Black Ops was same way with everyone using the same weapons until folks figured out how to be effective with the others, then you'd see folks killing the masses with hipfired sniper rifles or shotguns or pistols while they tried to stick with the ARs there.

I loved the MD until it was nerfed, now it's fixed and I'm working my way back into them again. But my AR fits won't be erased because it's a stand by. Also, a MD in Skirmish on an open map is pointless so choose a weapon that fits the map and role you want. The all around weapon of choice will still likely be the AR... stop QQ'ing about it

yeah real ARs have 30 round magazines. because it only takes 1 good shot to take someone down.

AR is not OP. been using every type. i used the TAC AR for most of my time playing, with my minmatar logi...

until two days ago

i took a chance and tried out adv lasers with a basic adv medium suit

destroyed the **** out of people, and when i was too close with the laser, my scrambler pistol or assault pistol worked fine, especially in a bull rush

i will never look back on ARs ever again, unless i run my minmatar logi in which i need close and medium range with the only weapon due to the lack of a sidearm slot.

i was so sure i would never move away from that TAC AR due to "how easy" it was to kill with. laser is so much easier

Then, after the inevitable cries of apocalypse, we would see weapon usages balance out to something more reasonable. Even then, we would probably have ARs being the most dominant, but it wouldn't be the "one weapon to rule them all" like it is now.

Actually the plasma rifle doesn't fit its description, it is supposed to have high damage but low range similar to a modern day smg. To balance it, it should have its range lowered by 25-35% and DPS increased by 15-30%, this could be by increasing both damage or rate of fire. The other rifles should be low damage high range, so it ends up being Gallente High damage low range, Minmatar med damage med range, Amarr low damage high range, Caldari lowest damage highest range. Also the weapon system should be changed to unlock weapons of the same type, not specific weapons like the assault rifle skill should unlock all automatic rifles not just the Gallente rifle. That way the ASCR is affected by assault rifle skills and it is a easy alternative to the AR.

Part of the reason AR seems OP is because folks have skilled heavily into it because the other weapons get nerfed/changed so much but the AR stays pretty constant. Also, every suit can use the thing so why not?

If you skill the other weapons into lvl 5 profeciency, they are just as effective and deadly, difference is that they typically require a different play style than the run and gun most FPS players are used to.

COD Black Ops was same way with everyone using the same weapons until folks figured out how to be effective with the others, then you'd see folks killing the masses with hipfired sniper rifles or shotguns or pistols while they tried to stick with the ARs there.

I loved the MD until it was nerfed, now it's fixed and I'm working my way back into them again. But my AR fits won't be erased because it's a stand by. Also, a MD in Skirmish on an open map is pointless so choose a weapon that fits the map and role you want. The all around weapon of choice will still likely be the AR... stop QQ'ing about it

This is simply not true. I have 0sp in AR's and can drop plenty with it. Matter of fact it does better than the SG that I have heavily skilled into, the SMG which many an AR user has claimed is OP, ect. You do not have to be skilled into many of the weapons. The difference between std and proto is actually very minimal for almost any weapon. However, if you want to say the grass gets greener later, it doesn't. At later levels the proto AR is actually even more imbalanced than the proto's of others, (we can use SG for example). The cost, CPU/PG is higher to use for proto SG than proto AR, but the proto AR has a higher meta level, (7-9), dmg, RoF, Ammo Capacity, Accuracy......

So what were you saying about skills being a factor? They are actually more balanced at std than at proto.....and even here the AR outshines. Not because it's "familiar", (seriously an AR in a game is familiar? is this even a real argument?). How many space age AR's did you fire before Dust? More than space age shotguns? If familiar is the reason, why is it not grenade 514?

BTW: as a self admitted competitive COD player, I call BS on everyone using the same weapons. Everyone might use the same weapon in that weapon's class, but you did not see a huge percentage using the same class of weapon.

yeah AR should be about 10% worse than the other weapons as its versitality is its strength

Its an assault rifle.

...ASSAULT RIFLE

Literally THE most common infantry weapon. Complaining about AR spam in DUST, you might as well complain about AR in every armed force in the world.

It's just not fair I tell you, nearly every US soldier being equipped with an M4!

The army should nerf the M4 so it shoots rainbows, and force soldiers to use other more ridiculous weapons.

I can't even believe people complain about spam, from what is SUPPOSED to be the most common weapon on the field.

Its an assault rifle.

...ASSAULT RIFLE

Literally THE most common infantry weapon. Complaining about AR spam in DUST, you might as well complain about AR in every armed force in the world.

It's just not fair I tell you, nearly every US soldier being equipped with an M4!

The army should nerf the M4 so it shoots rainbows, and force soldiers to use other more ridiculous weapons.

I can't even believe people complain about spam, from what is SUPPOSED to be the most common weapon on the field.

It's spammed cause it outdoes longer range, short range, and mid range guns.

It needs its range brought down to 40m, and the other niche guns need to be buffed BADLY!

Its optimal range is 45 so 40 range is nothing, what should happen is that its optimal range remain the same or dropped to 35 and its max range drops to 65, and increasing its DPS so it is more of a SMG/AR hybrid. Then increasing the ranges of the next tiered weapon to be 45/75, then 55/85, and lastly 65/95 and their dps increasing in an inverse order to the the range increase. Also high DPS does not mean high damage, just high damage output depending on how the DPS is calculated*.

I remember their optimal being 60, but I haven't checked in a while.

Its an assault rifle.

...ASSAULT RIFLE

Literally THE most common infantry weapon. Complaining about AR spam in DUST, you might as well complain about AR in every armed force in the world.

It's just not fair I tell you, nearly every US soldier being equipped with an M4!

The army should nerf the M4 so it shoots rainbows, and force soldiers to use other more ridiculous weapons.

I can't even believe people complain about spam, from what is SUPPOSED to be the most common weapon on the field.

Let me make some clarifying statements.

What he says is absolutely true. The point of every other weapon system is to support the rifleman. Modern militaries wouldn't equip everyone with LMGs or HMGs if they could, because they're all support weaponry. The idea behind them is to suppress the enemy (keep their heads down so they can't shoot back) while the AR people maneuver to destroy them. Grenade launchers are made to deny the enemy an advantageous firing position, artillery is to destroy vehicles or infantry in the open, air support is to provide a unique vantage point to cover the movements of the infantry. Every single job in the military is either being in the infantry, or being in support of it.

ARs are imbalanced currently, and weapons as a whole need a looking at, but the AR should be the most used weapon on the battlefield. All other systems, and I mean ALL of them, should be in support of them. Mass drivers provide foot-mobile area denial systems, snipers provide a different vantage point to engage entrenched enemies, tanks provide anti-vehicle and anti-infantry support, dropships provide transportation and limited air support. The other weapons should be viable in providing support, but at the end of the day, the AR should be the one completing the mission, whether its to destroy the enemy or capture the objective. That's his job, everyone else's is to make his job that much easier, or harder if you're on the opposing forces.

By no means should the AR be the end-all be-all weapon that dominates all others at everything. They shouldn't be. But all other weapons should be made to support the AR, not take it's place.

I am happy you agree the AR is imbalanced, but I think RL combat doctrine should NEVER be applied to a fictional space game with lasers and ****.

Every gun should be fun and effective in its own way, able to get kills independent of the AR, not subordinate to just assisting it

I agree that every gun should be fun and unique in its own way. But the combat doctrine of RL hasn't changed much since we began having wars. Naturally, the weapons and tactics have changed as we have progressed, but it has always been one unit is the main effort, and the other units support them.

Romans used the legionnaires as their main effort, with the auxillia to protect their flanks from cavalry, had their own cavalry to break up the enemies formation, archers to provide ranged support, and catapults to assault fortified structures. But in the end, the infantry was the rock the other units moved themselves off of, either supporting the infantry's assault or protecting them from the enemy's assault.

To this end, each weapon should bring the flavor of the race it comes from. The plasma Launcher should be unique and perform differently from the Swarm Launcher. But there function should be the same: to destroy enemy vehicles so that the AR people can assault the objective.

Ok, now you sound less like blasphemy.

But there are several weapons that are designed to be hard charging, objective storming CQCers. (Shotgun, HMG, Novas, SMG....) and the AR is outdoing them in their roles, with much better range, and the like.

The AR is filling its role of the Light Assault weapon, but for what it gains, it gives up very little compared to the others.

I think that it needs to either lose a little DPS, or lose a bit of range.

That, along with the buffing of the other guns.

In this, I agree with you. An AR beating a shotgun at CQC is ridiculous, and SMGs and HMGs should get a buff to make them shine in their roles. One of the big issues is that we don't have all the racial weapons and vehicles out yet. Once we have all the weapons then balancing them out will be easier, and adding in new weapons will be easier as long as each race gets their version of it.

Its optimal range is 45 so 40 range is nothing, what should happen is that its optimal range remain the same or dropped to 35 and its max range drops to 65, and increasing its DPS so it is more of a SMG/AR hybrid. Then increasing the ranges of the next tiered weapon to be 45/75, then 55/85, and lastly 65/95 and their dps increasing in an inverse order to the the range increase. Also high DPS does not mean high damage, just high damage output depending on how the DPS is calculated*.

They just fixed the game being an imbecilic dance where you had to stick your gun up the other guy's nostrils. We don't need you tards clamouring for gun ranges to be dropped again.

Honestly making a weapon worthless to force players to use different weapons to increase "diversity" of weapon is just stupid. I could go into how stupid it is but as we saw with yesterday debate.........you have no logical reasoning to stand on. You just want to limit peoples options so that you can see different weapons on the kill feed.

Also I love how everyone complains about the ARs desite the ASCR being better in every way. I drop heavies alot faster with my ASCR than I did with the AR.

Honestly making a weapon worthless to force players to use different weapons to increase "diversity" of weapon is just stupid. I could go into how stupid it is but as we saw with yesterday debate.........you have no logical reasoning to stand on. You just want to limit peoples options so that you can see different weapons on the kill feed.

Also I love how everyone complains about the ARs desite the ASCR being better in every way. I drop heavies alot faster with my ASCR than I did with the AR.

You don't seem to get it Semper Fi, so let me spell it out.

It's the simple fact that the weapon is so overused is the problem, thus something needs to be done.

Call it OP, don't, I don't care. Tell me about how other weapons are better, I don't care. The weapon is hurting diversity, and thus the game, plain and simple.

Something needs to be done. I am tired of playing AR 514. The game is suffering due to being AR 514. It doesn't matter if it's because the playerbase is stupid or the weapon is OP.

Personally, I believe it to be OP, but that's not really the point. The community has chosen it in far too much excess, thus the community is using it as though it's OP. It needs to be less desirable, plain and simple.

You can do this by buffing the other weapons, or maybe even changing the maps, but that doesn't seem to fit the CCP way.

Honestly making a weapon worthless to force players to use different weapons to increase "diversity" of weapon is just stupid. I could go into how stupid it is but as we saw with yesterday debate.........you have no logical reasoning to stand on. You just want to limit peoples options so that you can see different weapons on the kill feed.

Also I love how everyone complains about the ARs desite the ASCR being better in every way. I drop heavies alot faster with my ASCR than I did with the AR.

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.

it takes me half as long to kill a target with a gek as it does to kill a target with an hmg. and the range doesn't really make any diffference between the two.

Same kills as 11 of the 14 weapons combined. That's more than "more popular".

Where exactly are you getting this information?

The issue isn't the spam of blaster rifles, that is merely sympomatic of the real problem which is the imbalance of the rifles.

Part of this is due to their only being 2 of the 4 total rifles available yet.

Part of this is due to the basic starting militia fits favoring the blaster rifle fit over the scrambler rifle.

And a large part of this is due to the inherent, "never not" reason to use the duvolle.

As is, there is no scenario in which the duvolle isn't one of the best weapons. Close quarters, at a distance, accuracy, high damage and rate of fire, large clip size, tracking, it excels at everything. Maybe not as good as some specialized weapons in specific scenarios, but being 90% as good in 100% of the fields, is better than being 100% as good in 20% of the field.

There are a number of things that should change to resolve this.

1. Give a reason to use other weapons. ShotGuns and HMGs should by default be better in closed in areas or up close. The scrambler rifle needs to have its kick removed while zoomed in (there's no reason for this, and the Duvolle/laser rifles don't have one).

2. The Duvolle, and other blaster rifles in general, need some sort of draw back in comparison, be it a higher kick than the scrambler, a shorter effective range (and I mean actually effective, see below*) smaller clip size or poor'er zoomed in accuracy, or any number of other ideas.

* By effective range I mean range that is actually seen in game, 40m sounds short, but when you play the game rarely (unless sniping) do you see targets that are outside of your effective range. Using the scrambler rifle, you rarely have a chance to use your higher range at an advantage, because maps are generally closer than your effect range. If you do find that chance, your damage isn't high enough to kill someone before they seek cover. So, what is thus the point of that? You end up needing to use a charged shot to score head shots, effectively sniping, to have real range advantage. Which asks the question, why bother when the blaster rifle is 90% as good in almost every other scenario?

3. The shield discrepancy and the Scrambler Rifle. The other aspect, is that currently the only other rifles, the Scrambler and laser, get a distinct DPS decrease when you hit armor. The blaster rifles continue to chug through both shield and armor without consequence. This is another reason to not use energy weapons, as this fact isn't compensated by a higher DPS overall. So likely, if using the SCR rifle, you end up with a lot of enemies with 70% armor left and no shields, and no kills. The one advantage the energy weapons do have, is the ability to charge up a shot, and deal extra damage. Yet if you try to capitalize on this extra damage, the weapon overheats, damaging you, and ruining your ability to continue to do damage. You can't do anything else while the gun cools, you can't swap weapons, you can't throw grenades, you can only run around and hope that A, they don't kill you in this time, or B, they don't get away from you in this time. Why, would you handicap yourself with such a mechanic, that has no real advantage to it?

Overall, there are distinct reasons NOT to use the other rifles, but no real reason to not use the Blaster rifle. Hence, the never not issue. Players seek to maximize their efficiency and have thus specialized into the weapon that gives them the best return, the Duvolle. Making the best gun, even better, and the worse guns, even worse.

The problem is that the full auto AR is better than the breach and burst in all situations. TAC AR is still viable, but only a select few still use it. It needs to be a little less effective in all situations while the burst and breach get buffed so the AR is more diverse in its own class.
Also, I'm glad you enjoy the ScR but on paper it isn't that much better than the AR in all situations. You applied player skill into a niche weapon and can perform that weapons niche more effectively than a weapon that's supposed to be all around good. Player Skill > Weapon's Effectiveness

Oh I agree that the other rifle versions need to be retuned......dont get me wrong there. But calling the AR OP or calling for a nerf of the AR because you want to force diversity by making a balanced weapon horrible......is just a bad policy period.

And and on paper the ASCR beats out or is equal to the AR is almost every stat. It is a better weapon all around than the AR...there is no situation where the AR is better than the ASCR.

The issue isn't the spam of blaster rifles, that is merely sympomatic of the real problem which is the imbalance of the rifles.

Part of this is due to their only being 2 of the 4 total rifles available yet.

Part of this is due to the basic starting militia fits favoring the blaster rifle fit over the scrambler rifle.

And a large part of this is due to the inherent, "never not" reason to use the duvolle.

As is, there is no scenario in which the duvolle isn't one of the best weapons. Close quarters, at a distance, accuracy, high damage and rate of fire, large clip size, tracking, it excels at everything. Maybe not as good as some specialized weapons in specific scenarios, but being 90% as good in 100% of the fields, is better than being 100% as good in 20% of the field.

There are a number of things that should change to resolve this.

1. Give a reason to use other weapons. ShotGuns and HMGs should by default be better in closed in areas or up close. The scrambler rifle needs to have its kick removed while zoomed in (there's no reason for this, and the Duvolle/laser rifles don't have one).

2. The Duvolle, and other blaster rifles in general, need some sort of draw back in comparison, be it a higher kick than the scrambler, a shorter effective range (and I mean actually effective, see below*) smaller clip size or poor'er zoomed in accuracy, or any number of other ideas.

* By effective range I mean range that is actually seen in game, 40m sounds short, but when you play the game rarely (unless sniping) do you see targets that are outside of your effective range. Using the scrambler rifle, you rarely have a chance to use your higher range at an advantage, because maps are generally closer than your effect range. If you do find that chance, your damage isn't high enough to kill someone before they seek cover. So, what is thus the point of that? You end up needing to use a charged shot to score head shots, effectively sniping, to have real range advantage. Which asks the question, why bother when the blaster rifle is 90% as good in almost every other scenario?

3. The shield discrepancy and the Scrambler Rifle. The other aspect, is that currently the only other rifles, the Scrambler and laser, get a distinct DPS decrease when you hit armor. The blaster rifles continue to chug through both shield and armor without consequence. This is another reason to not use energy weapons, as this fact isn't compensated by a higher DPS overall. So likely, if using the SCR rifle, you end up with a lot of enemies with 70% armor left and no shields, and no kills. The one advantage the energy weapons do have, is the ability to charge up a shot, and deal extra damage. Yet if you try to capitalize on this extra damage, the weapon overheats, damaging you, and ruining your ability to continue to do damage. You can't do anything else while the gun cools, you can't swap weapons, you can't throw grenades, you can only run around and hope that A, they don't kill you in this time, or B, they don't get away from you in this time. Why, would you handicap yourself with such a mechanic, that has no real advantage to it?

The assault scrambler variant removes this ability for a fully automatic firing, but the kick and DPS issues aren't compensated in regard to the GEK/Duvolle, so why would you bother using it?

Overall, there are distinct reasons NOT to use the other rifles, but no real reason to not use the Blaster rifle. Hence, the never not issue. Players seek to maximize their efficiency and have thus specialized into the weapon that gives them the best return, the Duvolle. Making the best gun, even better, and the worse guns, even worse.

Nerfing the range but not buffing the DPS would put the AR as one of the worse weapons in the game, the ASCR is a great weapon and easily comparable, and sometimes outmatches the AR. But a proto ASCR will not compete with a full specced duvolle due to the duvolle getting skills to increase accuracy.

Precisely.

What you say sounds really good....only your information is all wrong. The difference between the dmg of the Duvolle and the ASCR against armor is 2 dmg per shot. Recoil on the ASCR??? Are you kidding me?? Thee is more recoil on the duvolle than the ASCR. ASCR from the starts gets the same recoil/dispersion as a fully upgraded duvolle (all recoil/dispersion skills upgraded).

Your initial reasonings were better. Everyone starts with a blaster rifle and everyone learns to play with this role first. So it makes sense that more ppl spec into this weapon and dont move on from there. This has much less to do with the AR and more to do with CCP prebuilt suits. If anything you can argue this point and I would not debate it because its true.

Just like the ASCR the AR is good in almost every situation so yea alot of ppl gravitate towards the good at all master of none weapon.

BTW I am an ASCR user....before that a SCR user. So I know what I am talking about when I say I melt heavies faster than I ever did with the AR. The bonus dmg that the ASCR does to shield more than makes up for the 2 less dmg to armor it does.

Buster take a note from this gal.

I can accept overuse, but not this much. It's way overused.

Also, it isn't natural. Only very modern, COD like shooters have this problem.

Quake doesn't even have an AR:

http://quake.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Quake_weapons

Most shooters prior the the newest don't have this issue. It isn't natural, and it is a problem.

Thanks for being rational about it though.

Here :

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

And here :

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

This is not enough data to form an accurate representation of gun usage, only a loose assumption. Also, recording kills completely ignores kill assists. Weapons such as the mass driver and scrambler rifle are less likely to deal a killing blow than an AR. Snipers often wing people only to have another merc finish off their target. Your analysis is too flawed.

The ARs aren't OP they are just the baseline weapon in this game and every other FPS in the universe. After the TAC nerf you don't see any bull$hit kills like you did with the flaylock.

A rapid-fire weapon that throws small high speed projectiles is just the most practical and adaptable weapon on the battlefield. They are meant to be the go to choice when you are facing a broad range of situations where you need a weapon that is versatile. Decent but not exceptional range, good ammo capacity, ability to burst and spray, etc.

They aren't meant to be the master of all and the specialist weapons in Dust are often underpowered or fail to shine in their area of expertise. For example, the laser rifle is insufficiently good at long range to offset its lack of versatility. This however is not the fault of the AR, its just that those other weapons aren't developed enough.

The reason you see lots of AR kills is not because it is OP but because players have made the choice to go for familiarity and versatility at the cost of range/AE/whatever.

Even if every other weapon was significantly buffed people would still use the AR because it is versatile.

Not to mention all the other weapons have not been released yet. Its siily to even talk about balance or over use at this point

Indeed, The AR is to be SHORT RANGED.

It out does the Current MID-LONG RANGE gun by a Mile.

Nobody saw that graph and wondered how much different we are from that?

Well the even though the AR is a short range weapon it does not mean its range should be smaller than the SMG which is a short-mid range weapon. The perfect range for the AR and lets say the Combat rifle would be having the AR max range right in between the optimal and max range of the Combat rifle, that way the combat rifle can perform well within those ranges but outgun the AR outside of the ARs range, and then follow this pattern for the rest of the weapons. Here are some numbers AR 35/65, Combat rifle 45/75, Scrambler 55/85, and Rail rifle 65/75. With this in mind the AR should have 23% higher DPS than the Combat rifle, 37% than the SCR, 47% than the Rail. Keep in mind DPS =/= high damage, this means the rail rifle will have the highest damage but the lowest clip and ROF.

Yes, I just was trying to make a point how Imbalanced the AR is currently.

Good point, and your maths seem sound for Balance.

EVRY other gun has been nerfed into the underworld because of "loose assumptions" based off of one, or two Matches!

Why not give the AR Rambos a bit of their own medicine!



All philosophical reasons aside, that is 34 Matches included in both of those threads.

And in both of those threads, there is One common denominator.

The AR has lead twice the size of the second place finisher.

In a grand total of 34 matches.

That is not flawed data.

That's the number of people they tested polio vaccines with. (The size of a School Class)

Obviously, you want to shoot down a bulletproof airplane with nerf darts.

This is true, this is the facts.

Not Paper accusations, and lacking of facts arguments.

Except the range for the rail rifle was wrong :P

Actually, for the record, it's 38 matches not counting the PC data, and more than 4200 kills total. If you ignore the sniper rifle kills for a moment, you will see that the AR kills amount to roughly all other weapons combined that are available to light/medium dropsuits. This means that out of the 14 available weapons to all classes, the AR kills amount to roughly the same as 11 of those weapons combined.

This is what I mean by AR 514.

It's illogical to compare this game to any arena style shooter. Gun usage comparisons are only valid if they're tied to other Loadout or Class based shooters.

When CCP adapts game design of suits for its use, there's a problem!

(at) Meeko Fent

From yesterday my deaths was like:

10 Sniper rifle
7 SR
5-6 TANK/blaster
5 LAV-bump
5 AR
4 OB
2 RAIL/Instalation
2 LASER
2 MD
1 HMG

NERF SNIPERS!!! TANKS! OB!! (joke) .... wait where are AR? No flylock ?

1. AR was nerfed enough.
2. Looking at all (yours list) I will be sugest nerf rocks... there are plenty of it... and I cant climb on them.

1. AR was nerfed enough.

In a RPG the classes would go;
Logi = Support (Medic / buffer)
Scout = Rogue (debuffer/assassin)
Heavy = Tank (team guardian)
Assault = DPS (damage dealer)

Armed with an assault rifle you would be able to do just that... deal damage.
I specced into SMG and Knives and actually prefer to help the team without engaging in combat (hack, uplinks, destroy equipment) but when I do it's usually the flaylocks, MD, and shotgunners that kill me... not the AR. And this is when I decide to charge whole groups head on out of sheer boredom (only rocking STD gear)!

Yea a lot of people use them... so f****** what!? If the weapon was OP then that's one thing, but your qqing about it being too dam popular! WTF man!? DUST has enough things that need to be done then to worry about a d*** popularity contest! When DUST gets to were it needs to be THEN you can qq about weapons being too comfortable as nobody would really give a d***.

Nobody uses the Scrambler rifle. ARs score 10 times as many kills as scrambler rifles.

Where did you get those numbers? After the post regarding flaylock pistols and so on I think CCP has a pretty good picture of how many kills are done with which weapon.

Here :

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

And here :

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

In a RPG the classes would go;
Logi = Support (Medic / buffer)
Scout = Rogue (debuffer/assassin)
Heavy = Tank (team guardian)
Assault = DPS (damage dealer)

Armed with an assault rifle you would be able to do just that... deal damage.
I specced into SMG and Knives and actually prefer to help the team without engaging in combat (hack, uplinks, destroy equipment) but when I do it's usually the flaylocks, MD, and shotgunners that kill me... not the AR. And this is when I decide to charge whole groups head on out of sheer boredom (only rocking STD gear)!

Yea a lot of people use them... so f****** what!? If the weapon was OP then that's one thing, but your qqing about it being too dam popular! WTF man!? DUST has enough things that need to be done then to worry about a d*** popularity contest! When DUST gets to were it needs to be THEN you can qq about weapons being too comfortable as nobody would really give a d***.

The AR seems to ignore HP stacking in every way. I have an idea lower RoF or Damage per round. Problem solved.

Or even make it harder to aim.....



EDIT: Hey someone post the base damage of AR round and multiply it by 750/60. Now take that number and see how long it takes to shred anything with less than a 1000 HP. Now that is an issue because the weapon actually gets better with more skills and it takes ALOT of time to hit 1k HP.

The AR seems to ignore HP stacking in every way. I have an idea lower RoF or Damage per round. Problem solved.

Or even make it harder to aim.....



EDIT: Hey someone post the base damage of AR round and multiply it by 750/60. Now take that number and see how long it takes to shred anything with less than a 1000 HP. Now that is an issue because the weapon actually gets better with more skills and it takes ALOT of time to hit 1k HP.

seriously i have had enough of AR noobs saying oh don't nerf a gun because its popular.


When SRs were [more] popular they got nerfed
FGs are now popular and are about to get nerfed
When HMGs were popular they nerfed them.
when MDs were popular they nerfed them.
When shotguns were popular they nerfed them.
when lasers were popular they nerfed,
fused locus grenades = nerfed.
the flaylock was very popular and people hoped on it to nerf it.
LAVs were popular and they nerfed that. tanks were popular they were ninja nerfed and AV is buffed.

wether the aforementioned was OP or not it was nerfed due to popularity (baloch LAVs were never OP, but instead of using AV gear, AR noobs yelled that they be nerfed.)

Added & fixed

Yeah, sad isn't it?

decrease the clip size... the end

Decrease the clip size of the Assault scrambler rifle also.

i think the range and all that stuff is pretty good... it is the backbone weapon... i just think if the clip size were decreased, it would be fine... if you can kill a heavy with one clip then decrease it... the only way you should be able to kill a heavy with one clip is if it was all headshots and he was an idiot for standing still, so he deserves it...

i say one thing at a time, and clip size would fix most problems i think.

-it would be less viable at CQC due to the lack of clip size so they can spray and pray for 10 min on one clip
-it would force players to look for cover because they will have to reload after like 30-40 rounds, so it will make fights much more strategic and frustrating
-the player will have to aim more or shoot less
-you cant take out a heavy with a clip in only body hits

i like the range, even when facing them, its fair, its supposed to be a an all around weapon that is not the best at anything. and i think a 30-40 round clip would fix that

breach rifles can stay the way they are, they pretty much suck unless you sneak up on people

(at) Meeko Fent

From yesterday my deaths was like:

10 Sniper rifle
7 SR
5-6 TANK/blaster
5 LAV-bump
5 AR
4 OB
2 RAIL/Instalation
2 LASER
2 MD
1 HMG

NERF SNIPERS!!! TANKS! OB!! (joke) .... wait where are AR? No flylock ?

1. AR was nerfed enough.
2. Looking at all (yours list) I will be sugest nerf rocks... there are plenty of it... and I cant climb on them.

This has already been answered in this thread by me.
I can't take any comments seriously from someone who can't be bothered to read the thread, asks a question that's already been answered, and then expects to be heard.

Also the idea that people have to move to avoid bullets is silly. My movement should not make bullets just not hit when they fire right at me. The bullets will go MUCH faster than me making my movement negligible. From what I have seen moving just reduces all damage taken from all sources except snipers, even on direct hits.


I think all weapons should have their damage reduced by 20-30% as well to make this less COD style shooter.

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"