Curious, has Daybreak every given an explanation why NC consistently underperforms?

True, but you can look at Average Playtime as a check on spread of usage times. The lower the Average Playtime, the less time the Users are spending using it.

Betelgeuse 54-A isn't just showing the most Uniques among BR100, it's also showing the highest Average Playtime among BR100. Massive numbers of Top Players are using it, and they are using it for large chunks of time.

BR100 LMG Total Playtime (hours) by Faction: per Weapon, as % of all LMG used per Faction
==========================================================
VS #1: Betelgeuse 54-A.....................................62%
TR #1: MSW-R..................................................35%
NC #1: LA1 Anchor.............................................27%
TR #2: NS-15M..................................................25%
NC #2: NS-15M..................................................21%
NC #3: NC6A GODSAW......................................20%
VS #2: NS-15M..................................................16%
TR #3: T9A "Butcher"..........................................15%
TR #4: T9 CARV..................................................10%
VS #3: Orion VS54..............................................8%
NC #4: GD-22S...................................................8%
VS #4: SVA-88....................................................7%

BR100 LMG Total Playtime (hours) by Faction: per Weapon, as % of all LMG used
==================================================
VS #1: Betelgeuse 54-A.....................................26%
TR #1: MSW-R..................................................10%
NC #1: LA1 Anchor............................................10%
TR #2: NS-15M..................................................7%
VS #2: NS-15M..................................................7%
NC #2: NS-15M..................................................6%
NC #3: NC6A GODSAW......................................6%
TR #3: T9A "Butcher"..........................................4%
VS #3: Orion VS54..............................................4%
TR #4: T9 CARV..................................................3%
VS #4: SVA-88....................................................3%
NC #4: GD-22S...................................................2%

BR100 LMG Total Playtime (hours) by Faction
==================================
VS................................................................42%
TR.................................................................29%
NC.................................................................29%

source: http://ps2oraclestats.com/monthlystats/

I feel comfortable using any of those Stats, relative to what I am looking to review. And I prefer to use them as they fit.

If I am wrong, someone can (and usually does) check me. Like was done with the GODSAW.

I can appreciate Q4 goes back farther, I'll have to check it out.

I typically only want recent info: it reflects recent changes, it reflects Meta changes, it more closely reflects the current playerbase, etc. But I can see how even "recent info" may be better when pulled from a broader net cast.

I can also see grabbing older data for time period to time period comparisons or to reference earlier games states, and that is now something I can take a crack at as needed.

I'm saying that if NS-15M conforms to a playstyle that has no suitable peer among LMGs, it's kinda silly to look at their usage as an LMG preference: it's a different playstyle preference.

A good example of this is NS-7 PDW which performs as a cross between SMG and AutoScoutRifles. Or TRAP-M1 which performs more like a SemiAutoScoutRifle, yet is classified as a Sniper Rifle.

In accounting, readers of the Financial Statements (these are the public reports published by a company to show what is under their hood) will often "normalize" (re-write) these Statements by identifying where the company BSed and then fixing it: lots of public companies use loopholes to BS in order to make themselves look how they want to their investors, guys lending them money, or the taxman.

Likewise, LMG data might need to have NS-15M removed from their LMG vs. LMG calcs. If their playstyle is so different, that their usage does not represent someone looking for a tool in a staple LMG situation.

It seems to have two roles:
1) unique playstyle some people prefer
2) actually being chosen in an LMG role

But for #2, NC and VS seem to rely on it less to fill LMG roles.

BR100 LMG Total Playtime (hours) by Faction: per Weapon, as % of all LMG used per Faction
==========================================================
TR: NS-15M..................................................25%
NC: NS-15M..................................................21%
VS: NS-15M..................................................16%

Agree 1000%!

The game needs to be balanced at both the Server Smash and Standard Play levels. To neglect either or to make changes to one without adjusting (of checking) for the other is courting disaster. Many Sigil Design guys struggled with conceptualizing and being able to see or wield large systems and keep them in balance. Some of them (notably many Seniors level Designers) even couldn't understand (or dodged) explanation of system errors when they were presented to them.

I've seen how hopeless it can be to get some catastrophic changes addressed from the inside of a SOE-spinoff Dev. I have no illusions how much more hopeless it can be trying to make inroads through posts in a (largely unread/ignored) forum.

Thanks!

Gotcha, thanks. I will have to start getting familiar with the data in the Graphs Section.

I look at it as a massive cornerstone in building out the successful competitive scene.

I don't get that. Please explain.

Probably the same person who gave starting TR Infiltrators the 99SV.

It's really not hard to figure out the game is in trouble, when they do things like these, or the make a Directive reward for Scout Rifles that can't be used by the Class that uses Scout Rifles... and it stays in the game permanently.

The average player skill on NC is horrible.

They actually have great weapons, but the NC attracts the most newbies. So there's your answer, start advertising that VS or TR are more newbie friendly and way cooler and then the NC will rise.

Its anecdotal nonsense like this that harms game balance. This isn't a new game anymore, there aren't droves of new players here that are bringing down faction skill.

Lmfao they sure the **** aint vets on Briggs

Who plays behind that firewall?

That's quite interesting as the % useage to a certain extent mirriors the performance stats I posted before (and it shows, I think, what I've always said, that the CARV is one of the most underated weapons in the game! ).

That Betelguese though. (I'm amazed the SVA-88 is so low, but I guess the Betel takes over from both it and the Orion)


NC NS-15m use is very close to Anchor use in BR100s too, again I'm surprised because I'd have though if you were NC and you weren't Auxing weapons the Anchor would be the only LMG to use (except maybe the GODSAW situationally).

Like I said it does give you some idea, but as kill per unique is actually kills per A unique user per day, it really effectively loses most of its usage.... er... use.

As it only shows the average of the number of kills per a unique user per day. Not how much it was actually used by said user in that day.

Which is to say 1 unique user per day could get 100 kills in 1 hour and not use it for the rest of the day, where as another could play all day with a weapon and get 10 kills.

So there is no real direct useage data in aKPU other than that it was used once per day (at least) and it got that many kills in that day.

PS2 data is often wildly spiky and so the monthly data can therefore be wildly misleading (it can also be spot on, of course, but it is impossible to tell which is which with only a month).

The graph averages usually allow you to go back to the last balance change (or at least 6-9 months if there hasn't been one for that long) which seriously smooths out that spikyness and gives a truer picture of performance.

Personally I don't really think any meaningful conclusions can be drawn about weapon balance with less than 3 months of data (and even that is a bit short), or at least comparing monthly data to longer term data to see if it is broadly the same, unless balance is ridculously off (which in most cases in PS2 it isn't these days - I can only really think of the Claymore offhand).

That isn't really the case with the NS-15M, the NS-7 PDW and the TR probably is about TRs lack not of SMGs, but lack of "longer range" factional SMGs, compared to the NC and VS.

But with LMGs and the NC the GD-22, EM-6, Gauss SAW S (and to some degree even NC6 SAW and GODSAW) fall into a similar type of useage. Even the Anchor does really as people often mistakenly class that as a great CQB LMG, when really it is actually a great mid-range LMG that is also still good at close range and longer range.

Now certainly maybe people will use the NS-15M as alts on NC, but your useage data shows that the NC is using the NS-15M at comparable rates to other NC LMGs, at least at BR100, and indeed comparable rates across factions and I doubt many get to BR100 on NC without getting familiar with NC LMG handling.

With the VS it is likely the choice of Orion, SVA-88 and then Betel lowering the NS-15M useage, I'm not surprised it is lower, I wouldn't ever choose a NS-15M over a Betel........ in fact I'm not sure what I would choose over a Betel (to a lesser degree the same could be said about the SVA-88 vs NS-15M).

Well I'm not so sure about server smashes, I think DBG has basically given up on organsied tournements (in a conceptual way, even if they still run the odd one), but certainly organised squad/platoon play.

Google it and Planetside and see what it can be set up to do (if you want to be depressed). It is appalling in a player skill sense and basically you'll never get banned for it.

Most NC default weapons are tailored to midrange combat while most of combats important such as taking a points are usually close range battle.
and those weapons are well known that high vertical recoils have longer learning curve than other cqc options.

Sorry but that is Bullcrap, I have no idea where you checked this but it clearly shows that through out the last 6 month the Vanu KD in average was twice as high as TR or NC. Your weapons are way overpowered and the weapons couldnt be more unballanced. The game is not fun playing anymore.

I'm sorry too, because that's actually what the developers themselves said, so calm your ****, close the gates of nanite hell and sit down.

It's true that the majority of NC are just bad. You can observe this through normal gameplay or even search up some YouTube videos on how bad some of these players are. Not just fps skill, but also leadership skill. NC lacks competent leadership. Also, almost every time there's an alert, all the NC are on the wrong continent...maybe this is why they keep losing alerts?

What you're saying is bullcrap, and we got half a dozen people on your other "vanu op" post saying how you're wrong.
Stating "vanu weapons are way overpowered" is a clear sign of a below-average player.
What Gundem said is completely true. Any good fps player can pick up a NC weapon and do better than the TR or VS counterpart.
The fact is that the majority of NC are bad, and brings their avg k/d down.

As a frequent TR HA, I'm not a big fan of the CARV. I recently switched over to NS-15m (recently bought it), and so far I'm liking it's accuracy much more for my type of HA play. My HA usage is very often not played as a CQC heavy front lines attacker (where the CARV would feel better than the NS-15m), but as a mixed-range, mixed-role player (with lots of AV) against a Vehicle Heavy opponent, with random enemy Infantry encounters mixed in.

I'd like to try the MSW-R, but I'm waiting for a sale... someday.

Oddly, the Betelguese is not available in Server Smash, where the Orion dominates in usage.

My NC HAs doesn't have the Anchor: budget. Though I am currently not using NC HA really anyway. My NC HA does have the NS-15m cause I purchased the NS-15m with DBC to unlock across all characters.

Anchor use has a ~30% edge over NC NS-15m and GODSAW use. Not major, but noticeable. And the NS-15M only covers 21% of NC HA.

NC BR100 LMG Total Playtime (hours) by Faction: per Weapon, as % of all LMG used
===============================================================
NC #1: LA1 Anchor.............................................27%
NC #2: NS-15M..................................................21%
NC #3: NC6A GODSAW......................................20%
NC #4: GD-22S...................................................8%

MSW-R use has a bigger 40% edge over TR NS-15m, but (1) NS-15M covers a full 25% of TR HA and (2) TR Directive gun limps along at only 15%.

TR BR100 LMG Total Playtime (hours) by Faction: per Weapon, as % of all LMG used
==========================================================
TR #1: MSW-R...................................................35%
TR #2: NS-15M...................................................25%
TR #3: T9A "Butcher"..........................................15%
TR #4: T9 CARV..................................................10%

Betelgeuse's use's 388% edge over #2 VS LMG VS NS-15m (and it's usage edge over all other VS LMGs) is absurd.

VS BR100 LMG Total Playtime (hours) by Faction: per Weapon, as % of all LMG used
==========================================================
VS #1: Betelgeuse 54-A......................................62%
VS #2: NS-15M..................................................16%
VS #3: Orion VS54..............................................8%
VS #4: SVA-88....................................................7%

But even as much as I don't like Imbalance, I don't think DBG Devs have a real viable play in devoting time to focus on balancing LMGs and the non-gamebreaking imbalance in the rest of the game:
1) they typically are not very good at it (other than just nerfing the offender)(though some recent changes done as DBG have looked better)
2) it typically takes them a lot of Design labor time to make any balance change attempts (and yet still #1 happens)
3) the Devs are typically much more impactful and !/$ (bang for buck) when they tackle creative, big impact, new game features
4) working on new game features often gets Art, Code, and Design all invovled
5) at the 10,000 foot level, the game will get a lot more buzz and visible change with making the new game features happen

If you're looking for usage time, you can look at Average Playtime for everything outside of ESFs (since ESFs data is compromised by non-active Weapons being not counted).

All these stats come with relative conditions. Using them selectively in concert with each other can provide some additional info, but again with relative conditions.

Again, use multiple stats to flesh out more info and give a bigger picture.

Average Uniques shows us which Weapons are getting pulled by more different players. Average Playtime shows us how long these Weapons are being used for. Average Kills shows us what is getting kills on the battlefield.

Average Uniques used with Average Playtime shows us the breadth of users and the duration of that usage together.

Average Uniques used with Average Kills shows us the breadth of users and if that Weapon is having an impact on the battlefield.

Average Playtime used with Average Kills shows us the level of the Weapons usage and the killing impact on the Battlefield.

It all depends on what you are looking for.

I also think a lot analysis on this leans on "more art than science". In the sense that you're also taking in battlefield experience or performance knowledge or player noise/reaction, and baking in an awareness of patterns and strength of correlations. While I generally, personally don't regard this as being overly complex to tackle and get (some level of) results from (for me it's just IDing then chasing the most glaring variables or patterns), I do recognize that most people hit a wall on this analysis stuff or have some blindside/bias that kicks their results/efforts in the teeth (gotta look for and ID your own blindsides/bias too).

I look forward to delving into the wider time range of data and seeing how it informs my results.

That said, while I know most stats people freak out about small sample size, I definitely do not. While I can appreciate its significance and impact, the bottom line is I am ok working with Quick And Dirty (properly qualified as such) if that's what I got, especially if I can use it in concert with other info. Sure, my conclusions will have "*" and red flags on them, but they can provide a crude framework that I can work with depending on my needs.

I'm new to using the NS-15M, I don't have massive hours with HA as a pure AI role, and I don't have experience across multiple LMGs (nor do I have many unlocked). In short, I'm in a poor position to comment on the differences between the LMGs from a position of personal perspective.

However, deferring to the feedback from youtubers ( and ... ), I get the impression that:
1) NS-15M is very good at long range among LMGs
2) NS-15M is very accurate and very good for those who can maximize aim for Headshots
3) NS-15M has very fast reload speed stands out among LMGs
4) NS-15M has 0.75 ADS movement modifier which is only available on a few LMGs
5) NS-15M has slow Time-To-Kill
6) NS-15M has a Faction confusing sound profile (non-ES)
7) it offers a unique playstyle that is different than other LMGs

Anyone shed some light on the accuracy of those impressions?

The Betelgeuse usage numbers are just warping usage for everything else VS.

I don't have the Betelgeuse and have no desire to grind it, as I rarely play VS or HA VS these days. But it must be a beast to command that kind of usage.

I'm a strong advocate about the need to balance SS for the following reasons:
1) SS Tactics are some of the most powerful in Standard Play, though they are currently only feasibly doable by a small % of the player population. Regardless, as long as they remain broken AND powerful, they will remain an element of the game that should be balanced.
2) SOE/DBG love the SS game. It would be better if it were balanced, so DBG could stop making ongoing plodding adjustments to SS that impact Standard Game.
3) SS is neat and potentially a great marketing angle for the game. If it were better balanced it would reflect compelling gameplay rather than the stunted Pinpoint Rapid Infantry Deploy mess it is now.

I don't play SS or Organized Play, but I think PS2 overall would benefit from balancing. That said, I don't think DBG Designers are up to the task (nor is the SS playerbase open to tampering with their crutches) and I would not advocate they waste time on it.

Ah, I meant competitive Magic The Gathering players. As in people who minmax using copious amounts of public data on Meta.

AutoHotkey sounds like a mess. I'm not surprised that DBG does not address it, I don't have much confidence in them on a game ecosystem level. Dealing with performance moding is a difficult issue for many games/companies.

I've been thinking on the subject, and I have concluded that one reason the NC may underperform compared to their adversaries is that unlike the TR and predominantly the VS, the NC lack any real game-changers regarding weapons that other factions cannot use. Let's put this into perspective...

The Vanguard Shield ability - its Empire-specific one as matched by the Mag-Burner and Prowler Lockdown - is essentially a "press F, for an easy 6 or however many second armour boost" style of ability. Ideally, it's the best because it provides more armour in tank versus tank combat scenarios, which is often invaluable for surviving those last few hits and dishing out that last bit of damage required to send the enemy tank to a burning Oblivion. However, real battles don't consist of tanks hitting each other at point blank range; the shield, in this respect, has the least impact. When compared to its Empire-specific counterparts, the Mag-Burner for the Magrider fundamentally allows them to reach places that give them huge impacts in battles, along with the best tank for finishing off those escaping vehicle that would just repair to full. Even Lockdown arguably has a bigger impact, because it makes the already high damage-per-second/minute Prowler kill vehicles like Sunderers and other such ground units even faster - this is more useful than the shield in regards of annihilating counter attacks. Not to mention the impact a column of Lockdown Prowlers have.

The Enforcer is easy to use at long range, but the Vulcan has the biggest impact in the battlefield, not only because the Harasser can close distances extremely well, but also because the Vulcan lets vehicles deal with air and infantry. Moreover, the Gatekeeper also has a huge impact on ranged battles and fills the niche that both the Saron and the Enforcer should also fill at similar levels, though the Gatekeeper does what it does better. The Saron HRB is also better at killing infantry and defending against air, and with a skilled secondary gunner you will be safe from at least ESFs. In this respect, the NC lack the game changer because the Enforcer is outperformed by the Gatekeeper in the long-range AV department, the Vulcan in terms of anti-infantry, (with regards to the two most popular Empire-specific Prowler/Harasser secondary weapons/weapons, and the Saron in terms of anti-infantry and anti-air combined)

The Ravens are a pretty powerful tool for the NC, but things like Engineer AV MANA Turrets have bigger impacts on the battlefield, because they have more range, and cost nothing to spawn. This renders the Raven a non-unique weapon because it can effectively be used by all other factions where it costs nothing, has unlimited ammunition, and is universally available. The Vortex, on the other hand, has the biggest impact on the battlefield; it is able to deny entire areas to ground vehicle because of their long range, and when used in conjunction, they're killers. The Lancer is even more so, as it's even easier to hit, and costs nothing to use. The NC MAX is by far the best AV MAX, and is great for taking out a single vehicle, though here we're looking at "the best" incorrectly. What niche can this MAX fill that isn't already filled by the AV MANA Turret, which functions exactly the same, is harder to hit, does more damage with higher alpha, and is universally available to all factions?

When it comes to real battles, the NC MAX does perform well because of the lethality of their shotguns at close range. Though even so, the VS MAX still beats it in my opinion, even though it feels to be the worst of the three regarding anti-infantry purposes. It comes out top in staying alive and dishing out damage to waves of enemies do to its smaller hitbox, accurate guns and fast reloads. Even in this regard, a dual Mutilator or Mercy TR MAX will slaughter waves of infantry even at a choke point. The NC MAX cannot do this unless it is spearheading the push. At choke points, it is rendered nearly useless.

In terms of AI weapons, every faction has really good long range weapons, but only one has the best all-around: the Orion on the Heavy Assault, and that's what matters for capturing points. Air is also a large part of the battle, and the Scythe is the best for gaining air superiority with its tiny frontal hit-box, high velocity guns, and fast reloads. It also has access to the Light PPA, which decimates infantry at closer ranges.

What we're seeing here is a different interpretation of "the best". Ideally, the Vanguard's Shield Ability is the best, (as is the Magrider's) because it gives the tank an extra armour and an inherent health boost when fighting other tanks. However, what use does this have in capturing facilities - the entire purpose of Alerts - or at any rate what impact can this have on the battlefield like a Magrider at an advantageous position suppressing enemies from a place where other vehicles cannot reach? What role does the NC MAX have other than fast room clearout, which is only useful following the main battle, that cannot be performed by other aspects of the game, such as Engineer turrets? What can most NC Empire-specific traits, abilities, and weapons do, and/or what role can they fill, that aren't available to the TR and the VS?

On paper, and theoretically, I'd argue that the NC are the best faction. Though because of the aforementioned, this just isn't the case. The VS have the most game changers which is possibly a reason as to why they win the most Alerts. The VS are good on paper and in battle because of the niches their weapons can fill. The TR also are like this, though to a lesser extent, and that leaves us with the NC. Ideally the best, though the lack of game-changing elements means not.

Not really. Check the planetside alerts site for some actual data instead of guessing wildly and you will see that VS tops none of the infantry classes in TKs.

Yeah it is not everyones cup of tea, or great for every situation, but equally it is used a lot by BR100s in those stats (especially for a starter weapon).

They probably know how bad directive weapon balance is, and they probably wouldn't be able to ignore it if the entire VS used them.

To be fair though the Betel is really just the Orion with a sweet, sweet ammo mechanic.

Well I mean you in the context of everyone, but I don't really think you (that is the devs) can balance for useage as it is influcenced by many things (or at least usage imbalance will almost always come down to issues of performance imbalance somewhere along the line). Balancing by performance is much more straight forward so long as the data pool is reasonable, especially when they have so few Devs left.

Although equally DBG should have data on everything, so they really should be able to do a much better job than the players can with picking up what and where is wrong (yet a lot of the time it is still the players that do so).

Indeed, I'm just saying that aKPU isn't really a usage stat (rather a performance stat with a hint of useage), just using unique uses per day and ignoring kills entirely probably gives a better indication of actual useage rates than aKPU.

The thing is aKPH usually does all that anyway in a/the most simple and direct way (which is why usually the performance ratio between aKPH and aKPU is more or less the same) and will most of the time show up any imbalance, not always, but most of the time.

It doesn't always when something weird is going on, but then neither does aKPU always.

Which is why these days I usually go Q4 aKPH then Q4 aKPU then everything else.

It is not really so much about the sample size as the scale of the variation, if you look at monthly stats you will often find weapons that look to be significantly overperforming (within that monthly time period), yet the next month it is another weapon that looks to be, yet when you look at the 6+ month average, all 3 faction competitor weapons are in fact performing equally (more or less) it is just the daily/weekly/monthly variation is high.

The monthly stats are good because they collect a lot of data that isn't otherwise readily availible, but equally they are bad because they give a relatively small snapshot of performance that can easily give a false impression.

As I'm sure you know perspective is always a good thing for comparative data; it is like trying to gauge the height of a tree when stood right next to its trunk, you're always going to get a better idea with a view from further away.

I'd say that is right, although I'm no expert with it (although I'd say more mid to long LMG range than say NC6 SAW long range), people that like it general do so for its accuracy with mobility, which probably explains why it isn't as popular with the VS when you consider the availiblity (at least until the last patch) of the Orion, SVA-88 & Betel - it'll be interesting to see if their changes change VS LMG useage.
One of the Anchors strenghts has always been accuracy (once you get use to its recoil) with mobility (less mobility, but more DPS), again the last patch has probably nerfed in that reguard, trying to make it more hipfire again, which IMO it was never particularly great at.

I don't have it either (maybe by 2020 ), but I think (because nothing else has explained its performance) it is just because of the unique combo of Orion-ness (with all its positives and relatively few negatives) with its ammo mechanic. It is easy enough to think of another LMG that might be better than the Betel in a specific circumstances, but it is impossible to think of one that is likely to be better in every possible circumstance.

Scarily the last patch may well have even buffed it (and the Orion), depending on how big a factor .75 ADS actually was.

Yeah, with its remaining few Devs I can't see PS2 really being balanced much in general (it hasn't now since they orginally started on the PS4 version), especially until they finish working on the Xbox version or whatever they are doing now.

It is basically at BOT level now, seemingly, almost on-par with an out and out direct aimbot, as it can mimic many of the things a really, really (really) good player might be able to due naturally.