Weapons: Charactaristical Definition

[Palerion]

Main Idea:

As the game stands, I think that each weapon type needs to be more defined, or set apart from the others, by its characteristics (I realize I misspelt characteristical in the title). It seems as though there is not enough differentiation between all the automatic weapons, therefore their roles are not as firmly established as they should be.

So...

Look at Battlefield 3. BF3 developers have managed to differentiate carbines, assault rifles, and light machine guns so that each class has a weapon fitting its position in the squad, giving that class the advantage in the situations it should be engaging at. It all comes together like clockwork.

It would be extremely helpful for Planetside 2 to do try giving each weapon a more distinct advantage in its role, too.

The Proposition:

Currently, Light Machine Guns serve their purpose well and fit the Heavy Assault class like a glove. Big and hard hitting. Now, the more compact weapons, namely Assault Rifles and Carbines, are kind of murky in terms of their roles. Upon searching around a little bit, I stumbled upon a Planetside 2 Wiki that outlined carbines and assault rifles to have differences that are not currently in the game. Now, I would link the wiki, but for some reason every time I try to the link redirects to a planetside universe wiki.

This is what the wiki said about Carbines:

"Carbines fire rapidly and can quickly take out enemies at close or medium range. Some can be modified with underbarrel attachments like grenade launchers or shotguns to adapt to the situation."

And this is what the wiki said about Assault Rifles:

"Assault Rifles are used exclusively by Combat Medics, and are highly versatile. They are most effective at medium and medium-long ranges."

Now, from these two articles, it can be inferred that carbines are supposed to be the quicker short-medium range killers, with inherintly higher rates of fire and more DPS at closer ranges, and assault rifles are supposed to be the quicker medium-long range killers, with more accuracy at longer ranges, thus more quick and precise distant kills. It fits the playstyle of Light Assault to have a quick short to medium ranged killer, and fits engineers by giving them a potent weapon to defend themselves from enemies at dangerous ranges. The assault rifle gives the combat medic more viability at killing distant enemies from farther back, where he should be if he is healing people and doing his job.

I think it would be wise to put this system into effect. Right now a carbine is just an assault rifle with more recoil, less accuracy, less damage at range, and better hipfire. Almost a direct downgrade. So, it would make sense to me for carbines to have a higher fire rate than assault rifles, at the cost of its already much lower accuracy at any sort of range. It suits the playstyles of light assaults and engineers, just as the assault rifle fits the playstyle of the combat medic.

Furthermore, by making sure each weapon has a point where it stands out, it is harder to call one weapon overpowered compared to another because that weapon is geared to be the most powerful in a certain situation.

[GTGD]

Considering it's nearly impossible to tell a shotgun from an assault rifle, it doesn't seem like they give much of a shit.

[Ghoest9]

Main Idea:

As the game stands, I think that each weapon type needs to be more defined, or set apart from the others, by its characteristics (I realize I misspelt characteristical in the title). It seems as though there is not enough differentiation between all the automatic weapons, therefore their roles are not as firmly established as they should be.

So...

Look at Battlefield 3. BF3 developers have managed to differentiate carbines, assault rifles, and light machine guns so that each class has a weapon fitting its position in the squad, giving that class the advantage in the situations it should be engaging at. It all comes together like clockwork.

It would be extremely helpful for Planetside 2 to do try giving each weapon a more distinct advantage in its role, too.

The Proposition:

Currently, Light Machine Guns serve their purpose well and fit the Heavy Assault class like a glove. Big and hard hitting. Now, the more compact weapons, namely Assault Rifles and Carbines, are kind of murky in terms of their roles. Upon searching around a little bit, I stumbled upon a Planetside 2 Wiki that outlined carbines and assault rifles to have differences that are not currently in the game. Now, I would link the wiki, but for some reason every time I try to the link redirects to a planetside universe wiki.

This is what the wiki said about Carbines:

"Carbines fire rapidly and can quickly take out enemies at close or medium range. Some can be modified with underbarrel attachments like grenade launchers or shotguns to adapt to the situation."

And this is what the wiki said about Assault Rifles:

"Assault Rifles are used exclusively by Combat Medics, and are highly versatile. They are most effective at medium and medium-long ranges."

Now, from these two articles, it can be inferred that carbines are supposed to be the quicker short-medium range killers, with inherintly higher rates of fire and more DPS at closer ranges, and assault rifles are supposed to be the quicker medium-long range killers, with more accuracy at longer ranges, thus more quick and precise distant kills. It fits the playstyle of Light Assault to have a quick short to medium ranged killer, and fits engineers by giving them a potent weapon to defend themselves from enemies at dangerous ranges. The assault rifle gives the combat medic more viability at killing distant enemies from farther back, where he should be if he is healing people and doing his job.

I think it would be wise to put this system into effect. Right now a carbine is just an assault rifle with more recoil, less accuracy, less damage at range, and better hipfire. Almost a direct downgrade. So, it would make sense to me for carbines to have a higher fire rate than assault rifles, at the cost of its already much lower accuracy at any sort of range. It suits the playstyles of light assaults and engineers, just as the assault rifle fits the playstyle of the combat medic.

Furthermore, by making sure each weapon has a point where it stands out, it is harder to call one weapon overpowered compared to another because that weapon is geared to be the most powerful in a certain situation.

Your analysys of the current situation is off.

-All weapons do similar DPSs by design.

-Hip fire in general is best for Carbines and worst for LMGs

-Recoil is best for Assault Rifles in general

-Damage retention at range is best for LMG in general and worst for Carbines.

-Each group has weapons that blur the lines so can pick a weapon to suit your style in each class - to a limited degree.

And its worth noting the the highest DPS of them all is CQC carbines - but they have terrible range.

I think the system worsk well over all. But a few guns could use some adjustment.

[Palerion]

Wow, which carbines are the CQC ones? And this wiki seems like a legit source with a valid, though currently not accurate, view on how the weapons (should) work. Now, I know I can be a bit stiff on things like this, but hear me out:

Honestly, to someone who isn't hip firing all the time, the hipfire difference between ARs and Carbines doesn't make much of a difference, and at a range where I find hipfire to be necessary, the small accuracy difference really doesn't effect my performance much. On the other hand, this plan involuntarily laid out by the wiki makes some sense in regards to conforming to the class's playstyles instead of just being balanced: more range versatility for ARs, more close-medium range superiority for carbines.

[Rbstr]

Honestly, to someone who isn't hip firing all the time, the hipfire difference between ARs and Carbines doesn't make much of a difference, and at a range where I find hipfire to be necessary, the small accuracy difference really doesn't effect my performance much.

With the basic examples of both and some of the others, yes there isn't a huge difference. But on the extreme ends it becomes much more apparent.
The close-range carbines that get advanced laser have quite the close-quarters advantage.

With Vanu, for example. Compare the short range AR the HV-45 with the Serpent carbine. At long range Compare to Pulsar C with the Corvus.

[Ghoest9]

Wow, which carbines are the CQC ones? And this wiki seems like a legit source with a valid, though currently not accurate, view on how the weapons (should) work. Now, I know I can be a bit stiff on things like this, but hear me out:

Honestly, to someone who isn't hip firing all the time, the hipfire difference between ARs and Carbines doesn't make much of a difference, and at a range where I find hipfire to be necessary, the small accuracy difference really doesn't effect my performance much. On the other hand, this plan involuntarily laid out by the wiki makes some sense in regards to conforming to the class's playstyles instead of just being balanced: more range versatility for ARs, more close-medium range superiority for carbines.

Im not particularly concerned with the wiki, Im more interested in how they actually designed the guns. I dont really see "should" as an applicable word.
Although if you think about it your wiki definitions are a very general discription of whats happening.

The Serpent the GD-7F and the Cycler TRV(an assault rifle)are the highest DPS weapons. The VX6-7 and LC2-Lynx and a few others are just a hair behind them.

[Palerion]

And by "a very general description of what's happening" you mean things are going in the direction that the wiki suggests, or that the wiki is very vague?

Also, I understand that the weapons can blur the lines a bit, but our current system sticks one class with snipers, two classes with ADS-centric weapons, and two classes with hip-fire-centric weapons. I'm just wondering how well the lines can be blurred in this way; will there be ADS-centric carbines that are not just a downgrade of assault rifles? If you look at the descriptions on many of the current carbines available, even the best TR ADS carbine yet in terms of recoil seems to be made for "accuracte hip-fire over longer distances". Will there be a point where they actually invite players who just don't like that hip-fire spraying playstyle?

[Ghoest9]

And by "a very general description of what's happening" you mean things are going in the direction that the wiki suggests, or that the wiki is very vague?

Also, I understand that the weapons can blur the lines a bit, but our current system sticks one class with snipers, two classes with ADS-centric weapons, and two classes with hip-fire-centric weapons. I'm just wondering how well the lines can be blurred in this way; will there be ADS-centric carbines that are not just a downgrade of assault rifles? If you look at the descriptions on many of the current carbines available, even the best TR ADS carbine yet in terms of recoil seems to be made for "accuracte hip-fire over longer distances". Will there be a point where they actually invite players who just don't like that hip-fire spraying playstyle?


I primarily use a GD-7F - and i aim about 90% of the time - its the best hip fire weapon in the game.

Out to ~35 yards this is almost no difference between carbines and assault rifles when you ADS.
But carbines generally give you better hip firing if you need it and assault rifles reach out further.

But most kills by all classes(except snipers) occur with in 35 yards while ADS. And all 3 weapon types offer multiple weapons that work well for doing just that.
Each class has a tendency - but they all overlap where it matters most.

I think you are making a big deal out of nothing really.

[Palerion]

I primarily use a GD-7F - and i aim about 90% of the time - its the best hip fire weapon in the game.

Out to ~35 yards this is almost no difference between carbines and assault rifles when you ADS.
But carbines generally give you better hip firing if you need it and assault rifles reach out further.

But most kills by all classes(except snipers) occur with in 35 yards while ADS. And all 3 weapon types offer multiple weapons that work well for doing just that.
Each class has a tendency - but they all overlap where it matters most.

I think you are making a big deal out of nothing really.

Perhaps so. I just get the feeling that my performance difference with the two weapons is so drastic, something is up. Now, when you compare NC carbines to NC assault rifles, do you see a large recoil difference? I compare TR assault rifles to TR carbines, so I'm comparing mostly upwards recoil to up and right recoil. But why is it that the Cycler TRV, though it apparently has the same recoil and higher fire rate, seems more controllable than the lynx, with 50 rpms less?