The much needed changes for TR LMG's

[Rolfski]

The most heard complaint about guns in this game is that they look & feel too similar but also perform too similar. To change that, a lot can already be gained with relatively little effort in the balance/statistics or performance department.
The class to start with is TR LMG's because they suffer from this the most imo. They should be very good in a specific role while sucking at another.
This is unfortunately not the case with TR LMG's atm:

T9 Carv lacks too much at distance to be a good all-round starter weapon
MSW-R is too all-round for a CQB weapon
T9 Carv S lacks customizability and underperforms at range for its intended role.
TMG-50 is too strong short-mid range while lacking at long range
T32 Bull doesn't know what it wants to be, it's too similar to T16.
T16 doesn't make sense, combining big magazines with mid-long range capabilities.


Below are some ideas for TR LMG performance changes. Warning: other factions LMG's need changes as well to balance this out (VS Ursa would be UP vs new TMG-50), but TR LMG seems to be the weapon class that needs most fixing:


T9 Carv: Great allround dakka gun with limited attachments.
Slight buff to 0,2 horizontal recoil to make it more viable beyond 40m at the cost of bullet speed (600 => 580: Not sure tbh, maybe this gun needs a straight buff).

T9 Carv S: Jack of all trades, master of none gun with amazing flexibility in load-outs.
Give it access to advanced fwd grip/advanced laser sight to pronounce it's flexible role and a slight buff to 0,4 vertical recoil to allow for better burst fire over ranges, at the cost of reload speed. This should make it a better and more flexible all-rounder to the T9-Carv at the cost of dps.

MSW-R: Dedicated CQB.
Give it 0,75 ADS movement speed (great for short-mid range) at the cost of first shot recoil (2,5 => 3,0) that should hamper it's burst fire capabilities.

TMG 50: Dedicated long range.
COF from 0,6 to 0,5. Decrease vertical recoil from 0,45 to 0,3. Increase bullet speed to 640. At the cost of fire rate (577 => 550 RPM). This should make it a better long range LMG and inferior short range performer.

T32 Bull: Dedicated mid range ADS.
Give it access to advanced fwd grip, increase ammo pool to pre-nerf status (never made sense) and kill it's hipfire bonuses. This should make it a great gun for assaulting bigger bases but not good enough for CQB or long range.

T16 Rhino: Sustained fire and high damage per magazine, close to mid range.
Increase ROF to 698 RPM, decrease reload speed to 3,5/4,6 sec. Standard magazine 150 (extended 250). Give it a hipfire bonus. Increase vertical recoil to 0,35, horizontal to 0,22, first shot to 2,5. Decrease bullet speed to 600.
This should make it a powerhouse to take out multiple enemies up till mid range, where the big magazines make sense, while not a make it powerful enough at longer ranges. Maybe take out the advanced fwd grip as well.


Btw all guns need access to 2x reflex. CQB to mid range guns need access to 1x reflex as well. And please, state very clear roles in the gun description mouse-over that should include recoil stats as well. People pay money for these guns and should be well-informed when buying them.

[ringring]

I've played with the Carv, The Carv-s and the Rhino.

The Carv-S was the only one I didn't like and to my eyes seemed like a downgrade to the Carv.

The Rhino suited me well and that's the gun I generally recommend if anyone asks me.

Having said all of that, I would need some persuading that a buff for any of these guns is needed. I'm not the best, far from it but I did ok with them.

[Rolfski]

Having said all of that, I would need some persuading that a buff for any of these guns is needed.
I'm not proposing a general buff, I'm proposing a more pronounced role, which should go for other empires as well btw. NC and VS LMG class is a mess as well.

[Ghoest9]

Ive been using the MCG lately.


Who cares abut other LMGs when you have that beast?
90% of the time it probably the best gun in the whole game that anyone could hope to be holding.

[maradine]

90% of the time it probably the best gun in the whole game that anyone could hope to be holding.

There is a growing body of data pointing to this being utterly untrue. In fact, from where I'm sitting, I'd rather be using any other TR LMG, sans the default.

[Varsam]

There is a growing body of data pointing to this being utterly untrue. In fact, from where I'm sitting, I'd rather be using any other TR LMG, sans the default.

I'd be interested in seeing said data.

[maradine]

I'd be interested in seeing said data.

It's not very far away.

http://www.planetside-universe.com/showpost.php?p=940088&postcount=64

Your MCG numbers for the same timeframe, by comparison, are 58,158, 3449, and 16.86.

[Falcon_br]

The tr has only 2 lmg.
Tmg-50 for long range.
Msw-r for close range.

End of discussion, all the others are not worth to get it, 100 certs the msw-r and 500 the tmg-50.
I have all of then (not the m32 bull because it is pointless) and they just plain suck bad, I can get some kills with the rhino, but I still like the msw-r and the tmg-50 more.
The t9 carv since the nerf, you can't hit more then two bullets in the same target in the same burst unless you have a foregrip on it. It is just bad, real bad.
I made a Vanu on the test server, I really can't believe they have all that variety of lmg while we only got two real options. They even have a lmg with the same status as the msw-r, but with 0,75 move speed while ads! And it is not the best in the VS arsenal!

[Varsam]

It's not very far away.

http://www.planetside-universe.com/showpost.php?p=940088&postcount=64

Your MCG numbers for the same timeframe, by comparison, are 58,158, 3449, and 16.86.

Kpu is kills per unit I'm guessing?

[camycamera]

ima just gonna get the minigun :D

[maradine]

Kpu is kills per unit I'm guessing?

Kills per unique killer. Total observed carnage divided by observed ubiquity of weapon.

[fierce deity]

These would be good changes. Clearly defining the role of the weapons is a good thing since it prevents people for spending certs/SC on a weapon that doesn't really suit their playstyle. The same changes would have to be made for VS and NC of course.

[Varsam]

Kills per unique killer. Total observed carnage divided by observed ubiquity of weapon.

In that case, be very careful with your interpretation of those numbers, as they can be misleading.

For instance, the Polaris is widely regarded as at best a mediocre weapon by most vets, yet it has the highest KPU rating. This is due to the fact that only a relatively few amount of people use it, but perform relatively well with it. You can see (to a lesser extent) the same issue with the Gauss Saw S, Carv S, and Bull, all considered mediocre weapons.

On the flip side, the Orion, TMG-50, MSW-R, SAW, and GD-22S are all widely considered effective weapons (and coincidentally -or not - also have some of the highest unique user counts), yet all fall at the bottom of the KPU list.

In both cases your analysis directly contradicts the sentiment of most Planetside 2 vets. So either the data you're pulling is missing a key factor (and I'm guessing here that simply dividing number of kills by number of users isn't really the most telling use of the data), or most people in this game have very skewed definitions of effectiveness when it comes to weapons. If I had to interpret this data, I'd probably say that the more popular weapons are simply diluted by less experienced players. In the context of the MCG (which, from your data, is one of the most-used weapons in the game), it might mean the same.

[maradine]

Maybe - who knows. I provide a healthy dose of personal uncertainty at various points. But I also know that the Law of Large Numbers is at work here, and I'm not tracking ownership - I'm tracking use. Make of it what you will.

Perhaps user sentiment knows something that the numerical facts do not. Or, perhaps you can't dyno a car from the driver's seat.

[Ghoest9]

I think Varsam is right.

The MCG is probably the most popular HA weapon with new players other than the starter gun.

I dont think you can can learn much of anything from those numbers concerning the MCG. You really arent learning much about any of the gun except how popular they are.




Perhaps user sentiment knows something that the numerical facts do not. Or, perhaps you can't dyno a car from the driver's seat.

Dont you feel embarrassed for writing that? You do realize that your sample is pretty meaningless because its in no way normalized or controlled - its nothing like a dyno on a car.

[maradine]

Not really. I get more embarrassing things than that in my breakfast cereal.

The numbers are controlled for popularity by uniques. This has been separately correlated (albeit briefly) in another thread to ps2-stats kph. If you want to make a skill-based argument for the kpu discrepancy - ie, that once newbs move from their starting gun, they go straight for the MCG, and then on to something more interesting later in their skill life, I think that's a valid point. Once I control for BR, I think we can peel that layer back and find out.

If, on the other hand, you're just arguing because this model doesn't account for your previously held belief, I don't know what to say to you. I don't play TR. I don't care very much about your numbers. By extension, I don't really care about you. Believe whatever you like - I'm not here to change your mind if you feel strongly about it. I apologize for stepping into your TR gun thread and won't do so again.

[Rolfski]

I would like some feedback about the proposed changes please. Are very clear and specific roles for guns welcome at all (like TR LMG's in this topic) and if yes, would you agree with the direction proposed?

This topic got down-voted on reddit (http://www.reddit.com/r/Planetside/comments/1k31wr/the_much_needed_changes_for_tr_lmgs/) but I'm having a hard time understanding why. Guess I wasn't clear enough about all factions needing these changes but the question still stands: Why would you invest in guns if they all performed the same with only minor differences? Just to get multiple Auraxium medals? For me, that doesn't cut it. I prefer very clear, specific roles for guns but maybe I'm a minority.

[Canaris]

The tr has only 2 lmg.
Tmg-50 for long range.
Msw-r for close range.

End of discussion, all the others are not worth to get it, 100 certs the msw-r and 500 the tmg-50.
I have all of then (not the m32 bull because it is pointless) and they just plain suck bad, I can get some kills with the rhino, but I still like the msw-r and the tmg-50 more.
The t9 carv since the nerf, you can't hit more then two bullets in the same target in the same burst unless you have a foregrip on it. It is just bad, real bad.
I made a Vanu on the test server, I really can't believe they have all that variety of lmg while we only got two real options. They even have a lmg with the same status as the msw-r, but with 0,75 move speed while ads! And it is not the best in the VS arsenal!

except the TMG-50 doesn't excel at long range as it supposed to due to the crazy jumping recoil of the gun even when firing short controlled bursts, the Carv & Carv-S are more accurate at distance shooting even with their nerf.
The TMG-50 is a very decent mid range gun, it does not do what it says on the tin however.

[Ghoest9]

Not really. I get more embarrassing things than that in my breakfast cereal.

The numbers are controlled for popularity by uniques. This has been separately correlated (albeit briefly) in another thread to ps2-stats kph. If you want to make a skill-based argument for the kpu discrepancy - ie, that once newbs move from their starting gun, they go straight for the MCG, and then on to something more interesting later in their skill life, I think that's a valid point. Once I control for BR, I think we can peel that layer back and find out.

If, on the other hand, you're just arguing because this model doesn't account for your previously held belief, I don't know what to say to you. I don't play TR. I don't care very much about your numbers. By extension, I don't really care about you. Believe whatever you like - I'm not here to change your mind if you feel strongly about it. I apologize for stepping into your TR gun thread and won't do so again.


So it took you 2 paragraphs to basically say - that your numbers dont tell much with respect to how you tried to use them, because they dont normalize a non-random variable.

[Varsam]

except the TMG-50 doesn't excel at long range as it supposed to due to the crazy jumping recoil of the gun even when firing short controlled bursts, the Carv & Carv-S are more accurate at distance shooting even with their nerf.
The TMG-50 is a very decent mid range gun, it does not do what it says on the tin however.
In that case, there is no such thing as a long range LMG (or any automatic weapon for that matter). They all have recoil and bloom. The point is that it's still better than most at long range combat. Just because something is better suited for long range engagements doesn't mean it should be EZ mode.

[mrmrmrj]

As someone who plays primarily as NC, I have to call bullshit on the claim that TR has no good long range LMGs. TR gets more headshots with LMGs on me that I ever get with my NC6 SAW or VS ever gets on me. That implies they are the most accurate. I love the TMG 50. I find it much easier to get mid to long range kills than my fully certed NC6 Gauss SAW. And the TMG 50 is better at close range.

[exohkay]

I think TR LMG's are underwhelming, and they do need a bit of diversification, just like the NC vehicles (especially the vanguard) could use a bit of a change.

Currently TR weaponry looks and sounds identical, and it feels pretty bland to use. I don't enjoy playing TR HA, except for the striker.

I think the data that has come out will be useful (CHEERS ORACLE OF DEATH) in exposing areas that could be changed/diversified.

Balance is a two way street, and if the TR weaponry is brought into line, I would expect certain other areas that are outperforming (read TR vehicle weaponry) be brought into line with the NC/VS options.

[MGP]

Ive been using the MCG lately.


Who cares abut other LMGs when you have that beast?
90% of the time it probably the best gun in the whole game that anyone could hope to be holding.

Pffft. MCG is a P.O.S. Anything you can do with MCG i can do better with LMG. MCG don't have a single advantage over LMGs.

[Adenn]

The CARV is actually a great starting gun. Good for short range and capable at midrange thanks to the sheer amount of bullets it throws at the enemy. Lacks at long range, but that's to be expected from a bullet hose.
The huge swap time is the only thing that makes no sense whatsoever, it's just annoyingly slow.

The CARV-S needs something to make it more than a crappy SVA-88. Advanced grip would do the trick and make it better at range than the CARV while still being worse than a T16 or TMG-50. The 0.45 recoil is perfectly manageable thanks to the low fsr.

The MSW-R is fine as it is. It trades the 0.75x movement multiplier for an advanced laser. Great for close but still capable at medium range, just like the CARV.

The TMG-50 jumps around like a maniac for no reason, but otherwise it's solid and good for long range. A buff to bullet speed would be nice, but unneeded.

The T32 Bull is a mid-short range lmg oriented towards accuracy and mobility. A mix of the MSW-R and the T16. I think that this could just use a larger ammo pool, it runs out incredibly quickly for a lmg.

The T16 Rhino is dedicated for midrange and accurate fire (.2 recoil with advanced grip) and is one of the best guns we have. Giving it access to a 2x reflex is the only thing i'd do.

In the end, TR LMGs are a bit lacking in variety (no real bullet hoses with crappy damage and huge rof), but the ones we have aren't as similar as you seem to think.

I pretty much agree with that guy. The proposed changes won't hurt, but I don't think they aren't really necessary either.

[exohkay]

Much like the VS Weaponry - a change to sound would be appropriate.

Perhaps the statistics that the oracle has pulled could be related to the TR tendency to stick in vehicles, as their vehicle weapons outperform the equivalent NC/VS ones?