So..... NC guns arent bad anymore.

[Ghoest9]

They werent all bad before but several of them had a highly annoying disadvantage thanks to the flinch code.

After trying the new mpatch for the weekend - Im happy.

The AC-X11 is no longer a suicide weapon inside 40 meters.
You can even sort of use a Piston now with slugs inside 40 meters with out failing horribly once someone shoots at you.(but really its still not a good choice.)

It too bad they didnt use this code at release - but glad they made the change.

[ChipMHazard]

Glad they finally did this, besides helping out the NC it was bloody annoying for everyone.

[VGCS]

Thanks for the report. Good to hear. I was one of the first ppl to really champion this cause the first month of release when everyone was blaming it on NC's weapon stats instead. Little annoyed it took this long but its well worth it if we avoided the mess of musical-chairs weapon rebalancing that could have taken place.... (and taken even longer)

[camycamera]

so.... you are saying the NC finally figured out how to aim? :P

[Loban]

I know this has been discussed like crazy. But I still feel that there should be zero flinch when shields are up, and flinch should be directly proportional to the amount of damage caused. Does anyone know if this is at all how they implemented it?

[Assist]

so.... you are saying the NC finally figured out how to aim? :P

Well said!

[Graywolves]

so.... you are saying the NC finally figured out how to aim? :P

I'm not sure about that but they're standing still in the open now thinking they can or something now that flinch isn't in their way.

[NUKABAZOOKA]

The crying stopped once they rotated into a good warpgate and realized their weaponry wasn't at fault for their lack of territory, just an awful, awful position.

[Varsam]

The crying stopped once they rotated into a good warpgate and realized their weaponry wasn't at fault for their lack of territory, just an awful, awful position.

very true.

[Bunk]

The crying stopped once they rotated into a good warpgate and realized their weaponry wasn't at fault for their lack of territory, just an awful, awful position.

big up!

[Ghoest9]

Except that no - we all still knew some of guns were at a serious disadvantage.

[Chewy]

Till the VR room comes I can't comment on this to much. I know my aim sucks, but I can't take my lack of skill as a NC norm as there are lots better than me and I know it.

We win the fights we want to win and loose those we don't want to loose same as everyone else. Without the VR shooting ranges and getting a feel on real(ish) targets it would take far to long to get more than personal opinions on this matter thanks to trial time limits and the 8 hour/1 fucking month cool-downs.

[Empra]

Ok this is all just my opinion and I don't think I'm smarter than any devs or anything

A lot of the NC carbines arent great, they are not very accurate and with slow refire cannot compete. Except the GD which is godly.

Medic guns tbh I've only tried default and DMR. default wasn't impressive compared to other empire starer medic guns I've tried.

The machine guns are fine but require a lot of certs to make them accurate enough.

I think the Jackhammer needs love, it seems to just not work for me sometimes and I seem to get killed by other faction shotguns in such a short time. For the signature weapon of the NC it is dissapointing as the accuracy is so poor sometimes that all the power and refire is pointless. When more accurate shotguns can get all their hits in nullyfying their lack of power.

I have played all the factions and have a feel for all their weapons, I like the TR starter weapons the most though.

The NC snipers are under powered only because having high body damage is almost useless when all that counts are accuracy and enough power to one shot head shot. Compared to like the XM 58 or TR rifles with higher refire they don't perform as well.

They are still pretty good and do have advantages but I think that the philosophy of power vs refire vs accuracy doesnt work out every time. higher refire and accuracy can trump power in many situations and the bigger portion of planetside is fighing in bases where some NC weapons aren't great. I admit I haven't tried all the weapons I'm not rich.

I think the certs for advance grip for NC should maybe be lowered or the attachments concerning accuracy should perhaps be buffed for NC or something I don't know.

The same applies for the reaver, no point in all the power if you can't actually use it. Very hard to keep up with other factions agility and speed, they fly around you and shoot you down because you can't turn fast enough. Certing into dogfighting frame to compensate enough to compete is expensive. Even with added armour no point in it if they can easily sustain their fire that little bit longer as they can always get around you for a shot.

I don't think the stats need adjusting just maybe some minor mechanic tweaks. Also Power vs Refire vs Accuracy isn't a totally balanced philosophy as it doesn't always scale with infantry. It does to a point.

Flinch update was a massive step, I do feel like I can compete better.

I don't think there are major balance issues when it comes to the guns but I think accuracy counts more than power and more accurate, easier to shoot guns are at an advantage atm.

btw I do try and be unbiased, I don't want any faction to be OP and I don't whine because I suck I know I'm not great tbh. my k/d is like 0.76 I'm not ashamed, I'm a good player because I try and help my team and I do get a lot of sprees just more deaths lol. I shoot walls and examine patterns etc for all factions so I try very hard not to be biased at all.

[Hmr85]

I never thought the NC weapons where horrible to start with. The removal of flinch has made things easier sure. But I personally always chalked it up to players not knowing how to properly use the weapons over the weapons being bad themselves.

[Saintlycow]

I feel ya, NC.

Your slow firing guns are a pain to use. Hopefully this does help.

Also, I hate that gate. It didn't seem as bad in beta

[Ghoest9]

I never thought the NC weapons where horrible to start with. The removal of flinch has made things easier sure. But I personally always chalked it up to players not knowing how to properly use the weapons over the weapons being bad themselves.


If you are good and fast shot who regularly takes everyone you see out with a head shot - then yes because you are awesome you wont notice the difference.

If you are average then the flinch makes a big difference with slow firing guns.

[Baneblade]

All I had to do to know something was wrong was check out TR and VS and perform miles better with characters that had zero unlocks or cert upgrades.

Apparently I don't suck as much as I've been lead to believe. Any average NC player will rip faces off as TR or VS.

[Hmr85]

If you are good and fast shot who regularly takes everyone you see out with a head shot - then yes because you are awesome you wont notice the difference.

If you are average then the flinch makes a big difference with slow firing guns.

I'm not disagreeing here. I am just saying that most players I have seen do not know how to use proper cover when attacking. Most players don't seem to know that burst firing with the NC weapons is far more effective then holding the trigger down. Most players do not seem to know how to properly load out their weapon with the right attachments. Things like this make a huge difference.

While flinch sucked, knowing when to go for cover and when to stay and shoot it out helps. Situational awareness helps. Unfortunately most of this is chalked up as weapon issue and not so much a player issue. Just my thoughts anyways.

[Graywolves]

I never thought the NC weapons where horrible to start with. The removal of flinch has made things easier sure. But I personally always chalked it up to players not knowing how to properly use the weapons over the weapons being bad themselves.

Yeah. I had a pretty big post about it but I'm pretty tired of being yelled out by NC. Just want to put it behind us and we'll see what the next big thing is.

[Ghoest9]

I'm not disagreeing here. I am just saying that most players I have seen do not know how to use proper cover when attacking. Most players don't seem to know that burst firing with the NC weapons is far more effective then holding the trigger down. Most players do not seem to know how to properly load out their weapon with the right attachments. Things like this make a huge difference.

While flinch sucked, knowing when to go for cover and when to stay and shoot it out helps. Situational awareness helps. Unfortunately most of this is chalked up as weapon issue and not so much a player issue. Just my thoughts anyways.

Yeah. I had a pretty big post about it but I'm pretty tired of being yelled out by NC. Just want to put it behind us and we'll see what the next big thing is.


So your point is that it was ok because NC should have been smarter and better players than VS and TR needed to be?


News flash - as a whole the players in all factions are the same.
When the average players on just one side had a disadvantage it was a bad thing.

[Bocheezu]

I'm normally TR, but I've been playing an NC dude a fair amount on the weekends lately, mostly as HA or LA.

Guass SAW is a monster once you get advanced foregrip. Made a gigantic difference for me and the recoil seems much more managable. Certain areas become lock down zones where one guy can wipe out multiple infantry at a time; chiefly among those the Staircases of Doom in any tower and a lot of the firing lanes in biolabs. It's easy to pop out from behind cover and get 1-2 guys at distance and get back behind cover to recharge shields. I went 67-3 in an hour doing this; I was camping the stairways at a Crossroads 3-way, and on an Allatum attack camping the stretch from gen room to the trees. 67-3 in an hour as infantry (not behind teleporter shields) is just hilarious to me; I am not a good player by any means and literally anybody could do this.

The Mercenary is not a bad weapon at all, either. I don't see it much on my TR guy, because everybody has GD-7F or a shotgun, but it's better than TRAC-5 and I actually have a better time with it than Solstice, which I didn't think was possible. For me, the accuracy and high damage more than make up for the low RoF.

[Xaine]

After playing all three factions for quite a bit, i'd say the NC's weapons are generally about as good as the VS weapons.

The TR weapons however are just better. The extra ammo they get in their guns just means they can shoot more/for longer when they need to.

Their reload times aren't great, but when you get right down to it - being able to 40 rounds instead of 30 (25% more) with the same damage is just not right.

[MrBloodworth]

Um... Same Damage as what?

[SGOniell]

I'm not disagreeing here. I am just saying that most players I have seen do not know how to use proper cover when attacking. Most players don't seem to know that burst firing with the NC weapons is far more effective then holding the trigger down. Most players do not seem to know how to properly load out their weapon with the right attachments. Things like this make a huge difference.

While flinch sucked, knowing when to go for cover and when to stay and shoot it out helps. Situational awareness helps. Unfortunately most of this is chalked up as weapon issue and not so much a player issue. Just my thoughts anyways.

If you run into a guy in the open, with no cover readily available, that entire statement is irrelevant. I'd find myself with excellently kitted out weapons, but if I ran into someone and we started firing around the same time, the flinch would kill me. Light assaults were burning right through me quickly, and I couldn't do anything about it.

[Hmr85]

If you run into a guy in the open, with no cover readily available, that entire statement is irrelevant. I'd find myself with excellently kitted out weapons, but if I ran into someone and we started firing around the same time, the flinch would kill me. Light assaults were burning right through me quickly, and I couldn't do anything about it.

Its not irrelevant, If your running out into the open and not already thinking two steps ahead of where you are going cover wise then your doing it wrong. I'm sorry.

As I stated above flinch was a problem sure I have never debated that. But making the generalization that the weapons and flinch where the cause of all your woes as most players seem to make it out to be seems meh to me. I have been playing NC for almost 10 years exclusively. NC in PS2 since week 1 tech test.

As I said it comes down to how you play and if your the type that runs in guns a blazing not caring about proper cover like running across a open field and or just generally using your weapon improperly and not burst firing your going to die to stupid shit like flinch and so on.

Like I said I chalk it up to player issues because honestly I didn't have any problems with the NC weapons like everybody else prior the patch and I do not consider myself a above average FPS player.

This is just my opinion.

[Xaine]

Um... Same Damage as what?

The TR weapons mostly (5 out of 6 Carbines) have the same damage as the VS equivalents. The Pulsar C has slightly more damage per hit.

However, no one uses the Pulsar C if they can help it, because its a bit meh compared to the other ones.

They have the same damage, yet they fire faster so they can put out more DPS. Ontop of that, they also have more ammuniton.

There is more damage potential in a TR carbine per magazine, than there is in a VS weapon. Its just a fact. You have more bullets in the gun, and the bullets do the same damage.

Not only that, but the gun also fires faster. So you can put out more DPS.

The 'trade off' is reload times. The TR typically have the highest reload times. Boo hoo?

Now, I manage to do fine with every weapon I pick up because i'm just good at FPS games. (Not because i'm the super l33t pro FPS player, i've just played a lot of FPS games over the past 10 years. Do something often enough, you'll get good) However, the TR weapons at everything from about 0 to 30 meters are just better than the other empires guns.

Its not a huge difference, but its pretty substantial.

[Bocheezu]

The 'trade off' is reload times.

And recoil; TRAC-5 has a higher magnitude recoil and a more severe right lean to it than Solstice does

From the weapon data sheet's FireModes tab, you have to do some detective work to figure out which line is which weapon

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/lv?key=0AuOojvNLMApVdEtIU1NKenEzNzZOSWNaanFqSUVxLW c&f=true&noheader=true&gid=61

TRAC-5 (row 14)

Recoil Magnitude Min/Max: 0.3
First Shot Recoil Multiplier: 2.35x
Recoil Angle Min: 20
Recoil Angle Max: 27
Recoil Horizontal Min: 0.225

Medium recoil, highest right lean, highest side-to-side jittering

Solstice (row 15)

Recoil Magnitude Min/Max: 0.25
First Shot Recoil Multiplier: 2.8x
Recoil Angle Min: 10
Recoil Angle Max: 17
Recoil Horizontal Min/Max: 0.2

Lowest recoil, medium right lean, medium side-to-side jittering

Mercenary (row 4)

Recoil Magnitude Min/Max: 0.4
First Shot Recoil Multiplier: 1.75x
Recoil Angle Min: 0
Recoil Angle Max: 0
Recoil Horizontal Min/Max: 0.175

Highest recoil, but it's straight up; lowest side-to-side jittering

[Empra]

The TR weapons mostly (5 out of 6 Carbines) have the same damage as the VS equivalents. The Pulsar C has slightly more damage per hit.

However, no one uses the Pulsar C if they can help it, because its a bit meh compared to the other ones.

They have the same damage, yet they fire faster so they can put out more DPS. Ontop of that, they also have more ammuniton.

There is more damage potential in a TR carbine per magazine, than there is in a VS weapon. Its just a fact. You have more bullets in the gun, and the bullets do the same damage.

Not only that, but the gun also fires faster. So you can put out more DPS.

The 'trade off' is reload times. The TR typically have the highest reload times. Boo hoo?

Now, I manage to do fine with every weapon I pick up because i'm just good at FPS games. (Not because i'm the super l33t pro FPS player, i've just played a lot of FPS games over the past 10 years. Do something often enough, you'll get good) However, the TR weapons at everything from about 0 to 30 meters are just better than the other empires guns.

Its not a huge difference, but its pretty substantial.

See I agree with that statement. When I play TR I have an easier time with the guns. Even compared to the VS.

In my opinion NC are lowest on the ladder because they miss so many shots that potential dps is not important when all of the lasers make your face holy, or the TR bullet hose disentegrates you, while you have to aim at their balls because it's the quickest way to the head via kickback.

I exaggerate but geting headshots makes all the difference and they are way harder to get with most nc weapons considering they dont fire fast or are accurate enough.

I have GD 7f I think, the CQ carbine for NC, closer to the TR gun, albeit with forward grip rather than laser, works fine. Refire VS Power trade off and range of course.

AC 11 20 round power carbine, relatively useless as it focuses on power with accuracy as the trade off and I don't think they scale equally.

VS machine guns? headshot from miles away, TR weapons? High refire and Higher accuracy than NC so at close and medium more hits=more death and supression. NC have to buy more "TR like" guns. That's why most people love the EM6 and the GD 7f or the other CQ guns. Gauss is a sniper rifle and all take hundreds of certs to get the kick down to competitive levels, also it means you have to buy those certs or you are less competitive.

So in my opinon the other empires have more damage potential, VS through more potential headshot damage and TR through the more potential for less misses or stray arm shots and higher refire.

Most the game is close to medium so.

[BlaxicanX]

Never understood the problem with NC's guns.

As my sig cards below show, I started off playing TR first, but got frustrated with their guns shooting silly string, so I changed to NC.

I've been maining with NC for awhile now as the card shows, and as everyone can see my K/D, while technically awful, is nearly twice as good as my TR K/D.

Personally I just like NC guns so much more than TR's, I don't think I can ever go back.

[MrBloodworth]

The TR weapons mostly (5 out of 6 Carbines) have the same damage as the VS equivalents. The Pulsar C has slightly more damage per hit.

However, no one uses the Pulsar C if they can help it, because its a bit meh compared to the other ones.

They have the same damage, yet they fire faster so they can put out more DPS. Ontop of that, they also have more ammuniton.

There is more damage potential in a TR carbine per magazine, than there is in a VS weapon. Its just a fact. You have more bullets in the gun, and the bullets do the same damage.

Not only that, but the gun also fires faster. So you can put out more DPS.

The 'trade off' is reload times. The TR typically have the highest reload times. Boo hoo?

Now, I manage to do fine with every weapon I pick up because i'm just good at FPS games. (Not because i'm the super l33t pro FPS player, i've just played a lot of FPS games over the past 10 years. Do something often enough, you'll get good) However, the TR weapons at everything from about 0 to 30 meters are just better than the other empires guns.

Its not a huge difference, but its pretty substantial.

I'll need to look it up, but I'm not sure this is correct. Also, TR guns have more of a chance of missing, and require way more recoil and flinch control.

I believe you are highly biased.

[MrBloodworth]

..............................Min................. .MAX

Track - 5 Damage: 143 @ 10m 112 @ 65m

Solstice Burst/SF: 143 @ 10m 100 @ 115m

The 'trade off' is reload times.
the same damage

Selective data use is selective.

[VGCS]

I never thought the NC weapons where horrible to start with. The removal of flinch has made things easier sure. But I personally always chalked it up to players not knowing how to properly use the weapons over the weapons being bad themselves.

This is exactly where everyone was WRONG because they didn't understand how the packet data & millisecond randomized interpolation was actually at fault. IOW: it didn't matter how good your aim was or how quick your reflexes and Recoil management adjustment was. In layman's terms: Where your computer told that you were aiming when flinching... wasn't actually where the bullets would go. You were basically aiming blind under rapid enough ROF's, and it was mainly due to technology limitations that started at your Modem & CPU-->GPU bottlenecks before input lag and your own reaction time even came into play.


You confirmed this reality multiple times yourself by asserting the same tactic over and over again: "it comes down to how you play and if your the type that runs in guns a blazing not caring about proper cover" ...yes, by bypassing those situations where you're on the receiving end of fire while attempting to shoot back, you also bypass all the technical limitations. Unfortunately that never really addressed the argument about HOW the NC guns (and all Semi Auto + Pistols as well) were at a disadvantage to much higher ROF guns with smaller Spread maximums

[Xaine]

..............................Min................. .MAX

Track - 5 Damage: 143 @ 10m 112 @ 65m

Solstice Burst/SF: 143 @ 10m 100 @ 115m




Selective data use is selective.

Tell me how often you fire at a target 50+ meters with a carbine. If you do, you're doing it wrong.

Recoil can be adjusted for. You can't adjust the Solstice to have more damage/fire rate/ammo.

[ruskyandrei]

Tell me how often you fire at a target 50+ meters with a carbine. If you do, you're doing it wrong.

Recoil can be adjusted for. You can't adjust the Solstice to have more damage/fire rate/ammo.

http://forums.station.sony.com/ps2/index.php?threads/nc-lmgs-are-inferior-overall.95983/page-5#post-1291138

[Chewy]

Tell me how often you fire at a target 50+ meters with a carbine. If you do, you're doing it wrong.

Recoil can be adjusted for. You can't adjust the Solstice to have more damage/fire rate/ammo.

This is why my thumbs stink :evil: . Im waiting for the VR room to get some video of weapons at all ranges and the amount of ammo to kill based off burst firing, controlled/uncontrolled full auto, and single shot as well as trying out as many "What If"s as I can. On paper stats read just as numbers, and I for one need to see what the weapons can do because I have no idea what those numbers mean. The numbers tell only basics, not the results that come under an untold number of variables we all see in each pulling of the trigger.

I tried to do something like this before but couldn't get anything started out of the need for many people and those that I could get all had conflicting schedules (all of them). Now that the VR room is coming it'll be rather easy to get video of real in-game views of what happens at no cost of SC or certs, just the time it'll take me to make loadouts and shoot at things that don't even move. Sitting on my ass is something I can do, my chair may be cheap but it's damn comfy :pimp: (failed emote)

Im about to move on to biting my toe nails. Meh, they need a clipping anyway so might as well :chomp:

[MrBloodworth]

Tell me how often you fire at a target 50+ meters with a carbine. If you do, you're doing it wrong.

Recoil can be adjusted for. You can't adjust the Solstice to have more damage/fire rate/ammo.

Lets ignore all data that counters our world view, that will help.

[wasdie]

The reduction of the flinch made me not run away from CQC fights anymore. It was getting to the point where I couldn't kill anything within 10 meters of me because high RoF > anything the NC had. Once the flinch started, it was over, you couldn't even spray and pray.

Now it's much more manageable.

I also just outright removed all of the 2x and 1x scopes I had on my guns. They bounce so damn much I can't hit squat with them. That seemed to help quite a bit. I also increased my in-scope sensitivity and I can more easily react to enemies now. It's really changed how I can play.

[Dragonskin]

I'm not sure why I play better with my TR than my VS.. but I do. I get higher scores and better K/D.

Now.. part of it is I made cert/purchase mistakes with my VS and my TR I know exactly where I am putting my points and exactly which guns I want. My VS was a lot of learning by trial and error.

However, the extra ammo in TR guns also helps a lot. I actually spent most of the first 2 weeks playing my TR having to force myself to stop reloading my guns so fast because I would constantly reload with 15 or so bullets left where on my VS I would be closer to empty.

I'm not convinced that I am better due to extra ammo alone though. I think a lot of it just knowing what to focus on with my weapons now.

[Chewie]

Which weapon is the best for heavy assault? Anchor?

[mrmrmrj]

It is up to your taste and the situation. I like weapons with the greatest damage per shot because I generally hang out on the edges of battles trying to pick people off. If you want to face 3 enemies at time, then high RoF weapons are probably better.

I really like the SAW because of the 100 round magazine but you need to invest in the double forward grip and the compressor.

For the new Claw shotgun, I highly recommend slug ammo. It gives the weapon solid short to medium range flexibility but makes missing in CQC a death sentence.

[SGOniell]

Its not irrelevant, If your running out into the open and not already thinking two steps ahead of where you are going cover wise then your doing it wrong. I'm sorry.

As I stated above flinch was a problem sure I have never debated that. But making the generalization that the weapons and flinch where the cause of all your woes as most players seem to make it out to be seems meh to me. I have been playing NC for almost 10 years exclusively. NC in PS2 since week 1 tech test.

As I said it comes down to how you play and if your the type that runs in guns a blazing not caring about proper cover like running across a open field and or just generally using your weapon improperly and not burst firing your going to die to stupid shit like flinch and so on.

Like I said I chalk it up to player issues because honestly I didn't have any problems with the NC weapons like everybody else prior the patch and I do not consider myself a above average FPS player.

This is just my opinion.

So let me get this straight, if a drop pod comes down near you while you're crossing an open area, then you're playing wrong? There's a lot of open space on Esamir with minimal cover. The situations I'm speaking of do make your comment irrelevant. There are situations bound to happen where cover isn't an option, where the flinch is what did you in, and no other factors contributed.

[Hmr85]

So let me get this straight, if a drop pod comes down near you while you're crossing an open area, then you're playing wrong? There's a lot of open space on Esamir with minimal cover. The situations I'm speaking of do make your comment irrelevant. There are situations bound to happen where cover isn't an option, where the flinch is what did you in, and no other factors contributed.

This is just a guess here. But I am taking it from your response your a lone wolf style player aren't you? You prefer to run solo a lot?

[Chewy]

Which weapon is the best for heavy assault? Anchor?

You best have the fur to back that name.

[MrBloodworth]

Wookie fight! Two Fur bags enter, one retains the hair, tonight at the crown megaplex.

[Graywolves]

If you have any problems with NC weapons right now but are still performing better on others, I'm going to assume it's because it takes you 30+ bullets to kill someone on any weapon.

[Innate]

Im waiting for the VR room to get some video of weapons at all ranges and the amount of ammo to kill based off burst firing, controlled/uncontrolled full auto, and single shot as well as trying out as many "What If"s as I can. On paper stats read just as numbers, and I for one need to see what the weapons can do because I have no idea what those numbers mean. The numbers tell only basics, not the results that come under an untold number of variables we all see in each pulling of the trigger.

I tried to do something like this before but couldn't get anything started out of the need for many people and those that I could get all had conflicting schedules (all of them). Now that the VR room is coming it'll be rather easy to get video of real in-game views of what happens at no cost of SC or certs, just the time it'll take me to make loadouts and shoot at things that don't even move. Sitting on my ass is something I can do, my chair may be cheap but it's damn comfy :pimp: (failed emote)

Im about to move on to biting my toe nails. Meh, they need a clipping anyway so might as well :chomp:

Of course it's infeasible in the extreme to take into account "real-world" variables when trying to analyze weapons. However, most of the real-world variables either add up to nothing (their effects are counter to each other in the average of the many, many situations that come up) or they represent a tactical advantage (like sneaking up on someone) in which case they can be treated as applying equally to any weapon.

I posted some thoughts here (http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=189891&currentpage=144#2864) about weapons "in vacuum" - i.e. weapons being used under perfect conditions with perfect aim. The fact of the matter is that the majority of vocal people are unable to view advantages and disadvantages in a detached, objective way - and those people will eternally cling to disadvantages of their own guns and advantages of other factions' guns.

The specific example I jokingly used was the TRAC-5 vs. the Solstice (moving and ADS). I even made this very troll-bait graph (http://i.imgur.com/jChgqzh.png) which shows there is a tiny difference in their bullet damage, with the Solstice being ahead for the effective range of carbines. In terms of theoretically perfect TTK, the Solstice is very slightly ahead outside ~20m. This is almost entirely because of its initial COF advantage (remember, this is moving and ADS). So at this point, the unobjective amongst us would claim that TR weapons (all of them, every one, not just the TRAC-5) are bad/trash/etc. happily ignoring the substantial extra damage they have per magazine and their advantage at closer ranges due to their higher ROF.

The reality is that the patterns used to offset the factions tend to make the guns pretty balanced overall, and the only progress being made torturing ourselves over which ones are better is primarily in satisfying our curiosity.

And recoil; TRAC-5 has a higher magnitude recoil and a more severe right lean to it than Solstice does

From the weapon data sheet's FireModes tab, you have to do some detective work to figure out which line is which weapon

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/lv?key=0AuOojvNLMApVdEtIU1NKenEzNzZOSWNaanFqSUVxLW c&f=true&noheader=true&gid=61

TRAC-5 (row 14)

Recoil Magnitude Min/Max: 0.3
First Shot Recoil Multiplier: 2.35x
Recoil Angle Min: 20
Recoil Angle Max: 27
Recoil Horizontal Min: 0.225

Medium recoil, highest right lean, highest side-to-side jittering

Solstice (row 15)

Recoil Magnitude Min/Max: 0.25
First Shot Recoil Multiplier: 2.8x
Recoil Angle Min: 10
Recoil Angle Max: 17
Recoil Horizontal Min/Max: 0.2

Lowest recoil, medium right lean, medium side-to-side jittering

Mercenary (row 4)

Recoil Magnitude Min/Max: 0.4
First Shot Recoil Multiplier: 1.75x
Recoil Angle Min: 0
Recoil Angle Max: 0
Recoil Horizontal Min/Max: 0.175

Highest recoil, but it's straight up; lowest side-to-side jittering

I take issue with your use of "jittering". Jittering sounds like a highly random occurrence, whereas both the TRAC-5 and Solstice have a very small range over which they can bump. Jittering would more correctly describe the Mercenary.

Assuming the numbers are correct (I only checked one set to get the general idea of how to do it), your analysis is a bit flawed.

The magnitude of recoil is a fairly irrelevant thing when talking about unidirectional (i.e. not balanced) recoil since to counter it you just pull faster. In this game, there isn't a gun (except maybe the semi-auto scout rifles or battle rifles) that is notably physically more difficult to counter than any other gun.

In addition, you draw an unnecessary distinction between exactly how biased the directionality of unidirectional recoil is. The only thing that matters here for balance purposes is the degree to which the directionality changes - that's why balanced recoil is the worst by far. The range over which both the TRAC-5 and Solstice can bump is the same size. You'll just pull slightly different directions for either of them in order to counter.

Also, the Mercenary which you describe as having the least "jitter" and as having straight-up recoil actually has the worst of all possible recoils - it has balanced recoil, which means it will randomly bump left or right on each shot.

---------------------

Also, in response to those who claim that flinch has no effect on weapon balance or "l2p" etc.:

All the proposed "counters" to flinch like "take cover" "don't get shot first" "don't run into an open field" etc. apply equally to players who have (or at least, had before the change) flinch-dealing monster ROF weapons. There isn't a specific "counter" to flinch that you can do with a low ROF weapon.

NC weapons are overwhelmingly balanced recoil with higher magnitude recoil and lower ROF/higher damage. If you need 7 shots to kill (common for TR and VS weapons), and flinch causes you to miss a shot, you've wasted 1/7th of a kill in terms of bullets and refire time. If you do the same with the average NC weapon (or weapons like the Flare, Pulsar C, TMG-50), you miss out on 1/6th of a kill and refire time - a higher price to pay. In addition, the way flinch works punishes balanced recoil because it basically takes whatever your recoil vector was and applies it harder - this means recentering a balanced recoil weapon is much harder after getting flinched. I'm not positive, but I had the strong impression that flinch also multiplied based on the magnitude of your recoil - so weapons like the Solstice were much less affected than weapons like the Gauss SAW or X11.

[Chewy]

Of course it's infeasible in the extreme to take into account "real-world" variables when trying to analyze weapons. However, most of the real-world variables either add up to nothing (their effects are counter to each other in the average of the many, many situations that come up) or they represent a tactical advantage (like sneaking up on someone) in which case they can be treated as applying equally to any weapon.

I posted some thoughts here (http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=189891&currentpage=144#2864) about weapons "in vacuum" - i.e. weapons being used under perfect conditions with perfect aim. The fact of the matter is that the majority of vocal people are unable to view advantages and disadvantages in a detached, objective way - and those people will eternally cling to disadvantages of their own guns and advantages of other factions' guns.

The specific example I jokingly used was the TRAC-5 vs. the Solstice (moving and ADS). I even made this very troll-bait graph (http://i.imgur.com/jChgqzh.png) which shows there is a tiny difference in their bullet damage, with the Solstice being ahead for the effective range of carbines. In terms of theoretically perfect TTK, the Solstice is very slightly ahead outside ~20m. This is almost entirely because of its initial COF advantage (remember, this is moving and ADS). So at this point, the unobjective amongst us would claim that TR weapons (all of them, every one, not just the TRAC-5) are bad/trash/etc. happily ignoring the substantial extra damage they have per magazine and their advantage at closer ranges due to their higher ROF.

The reality is that the patterns used to offset the factions tend to make the guns pretty balanced overall, and the only progress being made torturing ourselves over which ones are better is primarily in satisfying our curiosity.



I read most of what you wrote and everything you said in that link was based off of pure 100% aim with incomplete stats. You even said that yourself within 2 disclaimers.

"As of the time of this writing, the information regarding balanced horizontal recoil is not easily available. Without accurate numbers on a per-gun basis, I can't simulate the effect of balanced horizontal recoil on accuracy - so I've chosen to ignore it entirely. Just know that balanced horizontal recoil is ruinous to a gun's accuracy at longer ranges - the farther you go from 0m, the worse the accuracy penalty gets. In a worst-case scenario, even with perfect aim, balanced horizontal recoil is expected to cause an additional miss rate of 50%. That is drastic and something readers need to keep in mind."

And
"The "journey" up to this point is filled with sources of error - i.e. we expect differences between our calculations and what will actually happen in the game engine. I've artificially limited the range at which we will look at weapon stats to 80m. In my professional opinion, things inside this range should be fairly accurate with only minor differences between game engine and calculations.

It's important to note that the sources of error we met with are not random. This means that the relative value of calculations is not going to be questionable - better stats will show better performance. This is just a warning not to treat everything as if it's one-to-one with the game engine.

Additionally, the examples shown will all assume 100% perfect aim, something even aimbots aren't sophisticated enough to do without altering weapon stats."


I'll give you props on knowing your math and being able to get data out of just the numbers, but you assume far to much. First is the vacuum conditions at 100% aim. Not even at 0m can a person get 100% aim in perfect conditions thanks to where bullets spawn. When not aiming down sights all weapon fire is coming out of the weapon and not center screen. Grab a MAX as an example and you will see that hugging a target at 0m will make shots miss thanks to how cross-eyed MAXes weapons are, it's the same past a certain range. Load a dual AV MAX and fire in the distance. You will watch the shells make a long X with the crossing point somewhere around 75m. Did you account for that at all?

What I am planing on doing is planting my ass at set distances and fire on targets in as many ways as I can think of with every weapon that the game has. That is the ONLY way to see what really happens within the game. Your math may be right (I am not arguing that it isn't) but even yourself said that the data used in that math is either incomplete or could be flat out wrong.

There's also the huge amount of people that can't relate the raw numbers to how they work in game. They (like me) need to take a hands on approach before understanding something. You can tell me all the stats in the world but until I hold the weapon and test it under the conditions we all face everyday then those numbers have little meaning. More so if each variable (range, stance, target movement, target size) needs it's own equation done in a split tick of the clock.

In short-
On paper things read as you want them to without EVERYTHING accounted for (choosing to ignore stats and assuming perfect conditions as small examples). The only way to tell for real what can and can't happen is to say "Fuck it" and jump off the cliff. Till then we can never know for certain about anything.

[Mordelicius]

The fix to flinch locking is a great help to NC and bridged some gap, but,

The VS and TR still lead in sheer DPS. Sustained fire in high ROF and highly accurate weapons still have advantage in sheer dps since the longer they shoot, the more they hit.

- High ROF, Highly accurate win in pure, sustained dps
- High ROF, Highly accurate win with easier headshots
- High ROF, Highly accurate win in shooting moving targets

The problem is they didn't sufficiently mixed up the ups and downs. Vanu highly accurate, high rof, little recoil is just a dumb combination if terms of balance. Highly accurate weapons should be at least coupled with low rate of fire. High rate of fire should be coupled with large cone of fire at least.

They should be more careful with stacking advantages/disadvantages.

[Xaine]

Lets ignore all data that counters our world view, that will help.

The gun fires faster, has more ammo in it and does the same damage.

Short range (where 90% of my fights with a Carbine are), it does more DPS than other weapons.

Explain to me how at short range when recoil plays a very minimal part in a fight, you need any other stats to determine one weapons power against another.

[Innate]

"Stuff about balanced horizontal recoil." [1]

And
"Stuff about error and perfect aim" [2]

I'll give you props on knowing your math and being able to get data out of just the numbers, but you assume far to much. [3]

On perfect aim and bullet spawn mechanics. [4]

What I am planing on doing is planting my ass at set distances and fire on targets in as many ways as I can think of with every weapon that the game has. That is the ONLY way to see what really happens within the game. Your math may be right (I am not arguing that it isn't) but even yourself said that the data used in that math is either incomplete or could be flat out wrong. [5]

There's also the huge amount of people that can't relate the raw numbers to how they work in game. They (like me) need to take a hands on approach before understanding something. You can tell me all the stats in the world but until I hold the weapon and test it under the conditions we all face everyday then those numbers have little meaning. More so if each variable (range, stance, target movement, target size) needs it's own equation done in a split tick of the clock. [6]

In short-
On paper things read as you want them to without EVERYTHING accounted for (choosing to ignore stats and assuming perfect conditions as small examples). The only way to tell for real what can and can't happen is to say "Fuck it" and jump off the cliff. Till then we can never know for certain about anything. [7]

I'd like to say that, in general, I appreciate your attention to detail and your arguments against what I've done. I also in no way was trying to imply that you should not test things out in game. I was just trying to point out a few things which I will hopefully clear up with this post.

[1] Balanced horizontal recoil is a dice roll which makes you bump left or right depending on the roll you get. We have stats for horizontal recoil, and I could use those, but it'd be practically lying since every gun with balanced recoil has access to a Forward Grip (which 99% of them should use). Unfortunately, we do not know the exact effect of Forward Grips on horizontal recoil (i.e. I need the exact amount by which it changes). If I had that, I could figure it into the rest of the math quite easily. I simply have chosen not to do it since I would be doing it with significantly worse values than are actually going to be seen in gameplay.

[2] There is always error associated with measurement, and all my data except COF values are taken strictly from measurement. This warning was mainly to mention that it's impossible for me to have a 100% reliable 100% accurate mathematical description of things unless I have access to numbers that only developers are privy to (i.e. numbers that the game engine logic uses, not something you could datamine). But they are really damned close.

As far as perfect aim: imperfect aim (i.e. not having your gun pointed perfectly at the target) is a penalty which applies equally to every gun. Using perfect aim as a baseline is not a mistake or an oversight, it is a matter of choice. I could have arbitrarily chosen any level of aim and it would apply to all guns equally.

[3] Two different responses to this. First, I know you're probably talking about "assumptions" as in I'm assuming perfect aim etc. In reality, I'm not assuming that some player is producing these results - I'm using my set of "assumptions" to create a sort of clean slate baseline in order to compare guns with each other.

The baseline that I use would apply to every gun equally so it's somewhat arbitrary. The relative strengths and weaknesses of different guns are preserved no matter what baseline I choose. Rather than looking at the calculations for a gun and saying "this is what it does", it's better to say "this is how it behaves" and to modify its behavior in your mind in accordance with circumstances (if your target is moving, if it's dark, if the sun is in your eyes etc.).

Secondly, in terms of "assumptions" as in I made up numbers etc. in order to get where I wanted to go - the only "assumption" I made was that characters are 2m tall - I was forced to make a guess at this, otherwise I couldn't proceed. It's a really good guess insofar as it produces results very consistent with in-game measurement.

The length and format of the post is unfortunately not in the style of a guide, it's in the style of a "blog" about mathematical analysis. But this is the TLDR version. All I'm really doing is taking the gun's COF (per bullet) and comparing it to the size of a (standing) target on the screen. There's fundamentally nothing complex or incorrect about this procedure - the only variance from being 100% truth is going to be because of (small) errors associated with measuring sizes.

Results in the field are going to be different due to circumstances (humans are worse or better at aiming depending on distance, it's harder to aim at night or when the sun is in your eyes or when your target has a certain camo etc.), but the utility of these calculations is not in trying to simulate exactly what the gun will be like when you leave the warpgate - it's about giving you an idea or an expectation of what the gun will be like in comparison to other guns.

[4] I'm aware of all the behaviors you mentioned and they have no bearing on what I've done. I could very easily chop out everything closer than ~1m to simulate the distance the bullet spawns from the player etc. but what's the practical point of doing that? You know about this effect so you can safely ignore things closer than 1m. Just like you know that it's harder to aim when target are farther away or when they're moving and can adjust for that as well. Trying to "account" for all these factors removes the baseline nature of the calculations and makes their comparative value very low.

As far as MAX weapons, I'm aware of their cross-eyed fixture and my math does not apply to them at all (though I could easily change it to do so).

[5] I would never discourage anyone from doing science. Particularly not you in this case, since it seems we have the same aim - to build a framework of understanding in order to be able to rationally compare guns. Although in your case, and from some of the points you've brought up, it sounds to me like you're also very interested in mechanics-based "inconsistencies" like bullet spawn and interactions with latency (which my "perfect world" baseline calculations do not take into account).

[6] Gun stats and equations etc. are only useful insofar as they describe the reality of the situation. Rather than thinking of it as a dichotomy, I prefer to think of our two methods as two sides of the same coin.

[Bocheezu]

Also, the Mercenary which you describe as having the least "jitter" and as having straight-up recoil actually has the worst of all possible recoils - it has balanced recoil, which means it will randomly bump left or right on each shot.

If you can compensate for unidirectional recoil, more power to you. I cannot. Balanced recoil weapons are the only type I use and the only type I can hit people with. I do not compensate appreciably for anything -- I predominately aim for center of mass. If after 3-4 shots it trails up past my target's left ear instead of his head, it is useless to me.

[Chewy]

(to big to quote for what Im saying)

It seems that I may have read something in a way you didn't write. Sorry about that. Iv always been a person that NEEDS to get hands on due to my brains wiring being a bit fucked and an inability with mental and written words.

It seems like you're right about us being two sides of a coin (I even had that same thought long before getting to point 6). One side would rather be in the field letting ones subconscious do the work, and the other who seems to prefer knowing why in detail. Then again in that link you said that you did the same things with EVE. That can explain a lot about a person and maybe how they are also fucked in the head ;)

[Ghoest9]

I take issue with your use of "jittering". Jittering sounds like a highly random occurrence, whereas both the TRAC-5 and Solstice have a very small range over which they can bump. Jittering would more correctly describe the Mercenary.


.

You dont seem to understand recoil.

All guns have 2 types of recoils.
1 Directional recoil - the giun moves along a vector it can be vertical or slanted.
2 Balanced recoil - the gun bounces slightly back and forth side by side - the magnitude of the bounce may vary by gun - but I havent seen any one test it.

But its worth noting that slanted directional recoil does not inherently negate back and forth recoil - they are separate functions.

[Electrofreak]

It seems that I may have read something in a way you didn't write. Sorry about that. Iv always been a person that NEEDS to get hands on due to my brains wiring being a bit fucked and an inability with mental and written words.

It seems like you're right about us being two sides of a coin (I even had that same thought long before getting to point 6). One side would rather be in the field letting ones subconscious do the work, and the other who seems to prefer knowing why in detail. Then again in that link you said that you did the same things with EVE. That can explain a lot about a person and maybe how they are also fucked in the head ;)

Hey, just because some of us play EVE doesn't mean that we're fucked up in the head. :doh:

(Okay, maybe you have to be a little screwed up. I've played it nearly since launch, almost 10 years, so I must be bat-shit insane...)

Anyhoo, I haven't had a chance to play PS2 yet with the updated flinch mechanics, though I look forward to it. I've always liked the slow-firing, heavy-hitting style of the NC, but it in PS2 it's been more of a hindrance than anything else.

The irony I've seen in reading through this thread has been the argument from some TR and VS players saying that NC players just don't know how to burst-fire their weapons properly. The funny thing about that is that all the weapons have pretty close to the same TTK when fired full auto, so when you burst-fire a weapon, you raise TTK (and if you're burst-firing enough rounds to kill someone, you've defeated the point of burst-firing to manage recoil). So combine needing to burst-fire weapons with a flinch mechanic that put higher-RoF weapons at an advantage, and the result was NC performing poorly in scenarios where 2 opponents begin firing simultaneously.

And this is really where it gets to the irony; in order to counteract this problem, the NC have been buying and certing into weapons as similar to the TR and VS weapons as possible in terms of RoF and accuracy. This is the main reason why the NC haven't been completely steamrolled. If all of the GD-7F and EM6s and GD-22S were removed from the game all of a sudden, the NC would flounder.

So again, I look forward to playing soon with the revised flinch mechanic. Maybe I'll be able to dust off my AC-X11 and Reaper DMR!

[Ghoest9]

The irony I've seen in reading through this thread has been the argument from some TR and VS players saying that NC players just don't know how to burst-fire their weapons properly. The funny thing about that is that all the weapons have pretty close to the same TTK when fired full auto, so when you burst-fire a weapon, you lower TTK (and if you're burst-firing enough rounds to kill someone, you've defeated the point of burst-firing to manage recoil). So combine needing to burst-fire weapons with a flinch mechanic that put higher-RoF weapons at an advantage, and the result was NC performing poorly as a whole.


Something to consider though.

The whole 'burst fire" argument is kind of silly. With a few exceptions any time you would need to burst fire a slow firing rifle you would also need to burst fire high RoF rifle.

[Electrofreak]

Something to consider though.

The whole 'burst fire" argument is kind of silly. With a few exceptions any time you would need to burst fire a slow firing rifle you would also need to burst fire high RoF rifle.

The comparison is really meant to be more about the general NC doctrine of worse accuracy during sustained firing when compared with the other empires.

[Innate]

You dont seem to understand recoil.

All guns have 2 types of recoils.
1 Directional recoil - the giun moves along a vector it can be vertical or slanted.
2 Balanced recoil - the gun bounces slightly back and forth side by side - the magnitude of the bounce may vary by gun - but I havent seen any one test it.


I understand the distinction and the mechanics behind the two perfectly. I keep reading what you quoted trying to make it mean something different, but I am frankly at a loss.

(I even explained this concept in depth using a similar format and terminology)

[Ghoest9]

The comparison is really meant to be more about the general NC doctrine of worse accuracy during sustained firing when compared with the other empires.

Ya but if you look at the numbers and try it in practice that doctrine is more concept than reality.

Whether I use an AC-X11 or a Lynx - I seem to need to burst pretty much the same based on range. There is more shots in a Lynx burst but not much if any more damage.

[Ghoest9]

I understand the distinction and the mechanics behind the two perfectly. I keep reading what you quoted trying to make it mean something different, but I am frankly at a loss.

(I even explained this concept in depth using a similar format and terminology)

And you were wrong when you explained it. I am right.

[Innate]

And you were wrong when you explained it. I am right.

Mirroring inexact language of someone you are having a conversation with in order to more closely connect with them doesn't make you wrong. But let's do it your way.

You dont seem to understand recoil.

All guns have 2 types of recoils. [1]
1 Directional recoil - the giun moves along a vector it can be vertical or slanted. [2]
2 Balanced recoil - the gun bounces slightly back and forth side by side - the magnitude of the bounce may vary by gun - but I havent seen any one test it. [3]

But its worth noting that slanted directional recoil does not inherently negate back and forth recoil - they are separate functions. [4]

[1] All guns have 1 type of recoil. Either unidirectional or balanced.

[2] I haven't seen any gun in the game that can have straight vertical recoil though it was mentioned to me that one of the new SMGs can. Every gun I've seen bumps along a vector whose angle wrt monitor "up" can change over some range (I think there are some guns where the range is 0, though).

For example, the Solstice can bump anywhere between 10 degrees and 17 degrees off 90 (so between 80 and 73 degrees in normal coordinates). This range is fairly small, as are most unidirectional ranges. In this way, they are less subject to missing shots due to randomness than a balanced recoil weapon - this is the point I was making about "jitter", which is a word that semantically denotes random shaking, being more in line with a balanced recoil weapon (whose behavior is significantly less predictable than a unidirectional recoil weapon). Both recoil types are technically "random" but one is highly counterable whereas the other is not.

[3] On each shot, the game engine determines whether you bump left or right. All the tests I've done come out so close to 50/50 that I'm forced to conclude there is no bias. There are, in fact, different horizontal recoils per gun. The basis of the CARV nerf was in increasing the horizontal recoil which reduced its performance at range.

[4] I left this out of my quote earlier. At best, it's confusing. At worst, it betrays an... odd understanding of how recoil works. The idea that unidirectional recoil somehow interacts with balanced recoil is weird since no gun has both anyway.

[Chewie]

You best have the fur to back that name.

im the real one, sorry

[Ghoest9]

I believe there is no variance on the directional recoil figure - but the randomness from the "balanced" side tot side recoil can make the over all recoil path vary slightly from string to string.


Anyway I guess you and i have pretty much the same understanding and you just misstated it when talking to him.

[SGOniell]

This is just a guess here. But I am taking it from your response your a lone wolf style player aren't you? You prefer to run solo a lot?

You couldn't be more wrong. I run an outfit. Largest we get is up to two squads.

[Baneblade]

You best have the fur to back that name.

It ain't over till a fat Wookie is a rug in front of my fireplace.

[Chewy]

im the real one, sorry

Ok, what's your story on how you got that name if I may ask?

I got mine in JR high for being the only person in the building to have a full beard. Not even a teacher had man fur like mine.

[Shamrock]

I'll need to look it up, but I'm not sure this is correct. Also, TR guns have more of a chance of missing, and require way more recoil and flinch control.

I believe you are highly biased.

I think you can state a cross comparison if you play all 3 factions, every side suffers from the grass is greener syndrome, but there seems to be some self denial going on from TR players that just flat out refuse to acknowledge that they currently have a small edge however slight in infantry weapons.
Basically TR weapons are just as accurate as VS weapons but have bigger clips, hence they are outright better unless you find long reloads unacceptable. This doesn't mean I think VS weapons are terrible, I think they are great.

I found NC weapons clunky, and had to sink a ton of certs into them to make them feel acceptable to my play style, TR weapons felt good straight out of the box without a single cert being spent. I will admit this has a lot to do with "gun feel" which is highly subjective.

[Chewie]

Ok, what's your story on how you got that name if I may ask?

I got mine in JR high for being the only person in the building to have a full beard. Not even a teacher had man fur like mine.

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Chewbacca

[Vashyo]

I feel the guns have gotten better, I feel much better using my AC-X11. I like the high damage, slow firerate guns.

Though I still use my gauss Saw as a sniper rifle for the high damage and I feel safer for being heavy since I wont allways get instagibbed by infiltrators, the spread is still immense even in close ranges if u try to shoot it like the carv or orion. I can't believe how stable the other starting LMGs are, I've been killed from ridiculously long ranges by a person going full auto with them. O_

[Chewie]

I use gauss saw currently and just bought advanced grip for it. Recoil still is too high for me though, so i consider buying Anchor or another weapon with low spread..