In-Game Conflicting Logics

OCD Warning

In this thread I want to go over some inconsistencies in the logic currently used for the weapons in Planetside 2. First I'll provide all of the weapon names with a small description of their functionality. Then i'll address some of the issues that arise.

Vanu Sovereignty

Carbines:

Solstice - Default Weapon

Solstice BF - Burst Fire Solstice, Same Stats

Solstice SF - Select Fire Solstice, Same Stats except slower Rate of Fire + more attachments

Assualt Rifles

Pulsar VS1 - Defualt Wepaon

Equinox Burst - Burst Fire Pulsar, Same Stats as Pulsar

Equinox - Seleft Fire Pulsar, Same stats except slower Rate of Fire + more attachments

Light Machine Guns:

Orion - Default Weapon

Flare - Same Accuracy as Orion, Increased Damage and Magazine, Decreased Rate of Fire and Reload Speed. More attachments

Terran Republic

Carbines:

TRAC-5 - Default Weapon

TRAC-5 Burst - Burst Fire TRAC-5, Same Stats

TRAC-5 S - Select Fire TRAC-5, Same Stats except slower Rate of Fire and Reload Speed + more attachments

Assualt Rifles:

T1 Cycler - Default Weapon

T1B Cycler - Burst Fire T1 Cycler, Same Stats

T1S Cycler - Seleft Fire T1 Cycler, Same Stats except slower Rate of Fire. Increased Reload Speed + more attachments

Light Machineguns:

T9 CARV - Defualt Weapon

T9 CARV-S - Select Fire T9 CARV, Same Stats except slower Rate of Fire and Reload Speed + more attachments

New Conglomerate

Carbines:

AF-19 Mercenary - Default Weapon

Gauss Compact Burst - Burst AF-149 Mercenary, Same Stats

Gauss Compact S - Select Fire AF-19 Mercenary, Same Stats except slower Rate of Fire and Reload Speed + more attachments

Assualt Rifles:

Gauss Rifle - Default Weapon

Gauss Rifle Burst - Burst Fire Gauss Rifle, Same Stats

Gauss Rifle S - Select Fire Gauss Rifle, Same Stats except slower Rate of Fire and Reload Speed + more attachments

Light Machineguns:

NC6 Gauss SAW - Default Weapon

Gauss SAW S - Select Fire Gauss SAW, Decreased Damage and Magazine, Increased Rate of Fire and Reload Capacity, More attachments, Same Accuracy,

Weapon Naming Logic - Fire Mode Variants

Currently there are several different formats that are used (or not used) for naming of weapons and their fire mode varients.

Currently the designation for burst is pretty all over the place. I'de recommend something along the lines of this for each faction:

Weapon Naming Logic - Light Machine Gun Varients

The Select Fire Varients are designed around being able to equip every attachment at the expense of performing a little worse then the base varients. The TR serve as the ideal example for this issue. Currently the T9 CARV-S has close to the same stats as the T9 CARV, like every other select fire weapon in the other categories, slower rate of fire being the key penalty. This isn't the case for the VS and the TR currently.

- The Vanu's highly customizable LMG, the Flare, behaves completely differently then the Orion, when in actuality it should functionally be the Orion Select.

- The New Cong's highly customizable LMG the Gauss SAW S, behaves completely differently from the NC9 Gauss SAW. The base Gauss SAW does more damage a shot and has a much slower rate of fire.

The LMG's for these 2 factions complete go against the logic established in their own factions with their own select fire varieants.

I don't have a solution for the current LMG situations as i'm sure it would not be in the best interest of your customers to revert all of the stats for the VS and NC ones to nearly identical stats of the default weapons. It also wouldn't be very good to reduce the attachments on the current ones to release a proper Orion Select or to make the Gauss Saw S of current a different weapon with less attachments.

Surely if two factions do it one way, and the remaining faction does it another, then that remaining faction is the one going against the grain?

nah,your just being nitpicking.

Should the TR in the final sentence be NC?

Since TR is your example, I assume the 2 which do not meet it are the two which are not TR?

This is why I went with inter faction, previously established logic. SF weapons are the same as the ones they are based off of but perform slightly worse for a wider array of attachments. Why are the LMG's different? Why is the select fire version of the same weapon (Gauss SAW vs Gauss SAW S) treated as functionally different weapons with different selling points? I know not a one who bought the flare for it's fire modes (which arn't even advertised).

See Response above.

I wouldn't nit pick if I didn't care. The above just screams "not polished" "rush release." In beta the names were fine and followed the same logic but on release they decided to name the Pulsar Carbine to the Solstice for some unknown reason, as well as the other f*ckery

The pulsar compact still exists. The Solstice is not a re-name but a slightly different rifle.

No, the current Pulsar C was another weapon in beta. The current Solstice used to be statistically the same as the old Pulsar C. It's literally the first thing I checked (and was confused by) on launch.

http://wiki.planetside-universe.com/ps/index.php?title=Pulsar_Compact_VSS&oldid=3606

and

http://wiki.planetside-universe.com/ps/Beta_Update_(2012/11/02)#Vanu_Sovereignty:

This is kinda confusing. Why does the Gauss compact have a name that's completely different from the weapon it's supposed to be a "attachment variant" of? Feels kinda half-*****.

Is this really a thing? I mean yes, illogical, but so is like 2/3rds of the game.

Exactly my question

Yes, I feel it shows a lack of attention to details and makes alot of stuff just seemed crapped out and not thought out. I'm not expecting fixes to this now, this is more of a 'down the road, small tweeks and fixes' thing for later down the road. It's still pretty confusing having weapons with the same names that are functionally a completely different weapon though and that's enough to cause either buyer's remorse or refund tickets.

Just saw something else that kinda bothered me.

As you all know, VS and TR start with a semi auto sniper whereas the NC start with a bolt action. This is not what bothers me. What bothers me is the current layout for the unlocks AFTER that. Currently it looks like this: (Green is Semi-Auto, Red is Bolt Action)

VS and TR

1. Semi Auto Default Sniper (0 Certs)
2. Bolt Action Basic Sniper (100 Certs)
3. Bolt Action Close Range Sniper (250 Certs)
4. Semi Auto Close Range Sniper (500 Certs)

NC

1. Bolt Action Default Sniper (0 Certs)
2. Semi Auto Basic Sniper (100 Certs)
3. Bolt Action Close Range Sniper (250 Certs)
4. Semi Auto Close Range Sniper (500 Certs)

The issue lies with 3 and 4. I can't speak for the TR and VS as a whole but logically shouldn't it look more like this?

VS and TR adjusted

1. Semi Auto Default Sniper (0 Certs)
2. Bolt Action Basic Sniper (100 Certs)
3. Semi Auto Close Range Sniper (250 Certs)
4. Bolt Action Close Range Sniper (500 Certs)

Please fix SOE, it gives the NC a unique, hard hitting slow firing rate of progression for their snipers instead of getting the same options as the others, which makes no sense.

i have a ridiculously stupid note that was left out. TMG 50, TR vs the Flare for VS. why does the flare and tmg 50 have almost identical stats but the TR, the ones who believe more bullets fk sht up have one less mag? is this just complete disregard or what? im very confused here. also the pulsar lsw and the carv-s. the lsw not only has a predictable up left (or right) recoil pattern, but also has MASSIVE reload speed time difference and overall less recoil. come on and get this **** straight. im tired of the vanu complaining about the carv-s being op when the stats dictate otherwise
this is the spreadsheet i am getting my information off of same one used by level cap gaming
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...LMG&sortcolid=-1&sortasc=true&rowsperpage=250
(sorry for any vanu i offended :S)

Pulsar LSW (my main atm) vs CARV-S

The 25 round magazine difference is why the reload on the CARV-S is longer and why the Pulsar LSW's is shorter. Also, the CARV-S has a higher minimum damage. This fits better then the other LMG comparisons funny enough.All TR carbines and AR's have the 25% bonus ammo capacity and the vs get bonus reload speed since they do the same max damage and have worse min damage.

No idea about the TMG-50. Functionality wise I think the Ursa is supposed to be the equivalent of the TMG-50. Still doesn't explain why we get more ammo w/ same mag sizes. Might be switched? Should be switched.

true the lsw and the carvs are very similar but the main point is the recoil being up and right means it is controllable and not random. its a very important and often overlooked aspect of any gun

That's our faction's strength though. Why have lower recoil when you can throw more bullets at it?

i dont really find that the 25 less shots is much of a crutch considering its got the second fastest reload speed of any LMG out there beaten only by the orion. while the carv s can get a compensator that means trading off a couple more stats where as the LSW is already at that level. while i do love my t9 carv (dont have the s yet) i feel that the skillcap is being chopped in half because instead of having a definite recoil pattern it rattles like a mother ****** where as the same suited gun on the other faction can be held down and the only thing they have to worry about is the COF not screwing them over. IMO no gun should have a <^> recoil it should be either <x^(x being the amount of pull to right/left) or ^x> i rarely have issues however and frankly no comments on the balance of the factions so happy fragging

Didn't notice your response since you didn't quote me.

I know it sounds dangerously cheesy and like a fall back but I think in that situation, the two LMG's we're comparing fit the faction attributes with trade offs and benefits on both sides. Only in that situation. THere are definatly situations where there may be a faction weapon that's just plain better then another one's in every way and I do not agree with these. (Ursa/Flare vs. TMG-50). The situation with the Pulsar LSW and the CARV totally fit though.

p.s: my CARV is fully upgraded now. I couldn't imagine running it without Flash Suppressor or Suppressor ever again. The mussle flash on the CARV can sometimes take up well above your crosshair and blinds me. I have no peripheral vision and my central vision is ****** up so when something flickers on my screen where i'm looking, it's essentially completely blinding a large portion of my viewing field. That's a personal issue mostly but I still find it obnoxious that TR's are by far upwards of 2 times larger at the VERY least and upwards of 4x larger at the very MOST compared to NC and VS muzzle flashes. WHAT'S UP WITH THAT!?

point being, please dont remove the flash suppressor for carv in place of compensator ;_; blind man's plight

Good points there.
But i would actually like SOE to also fix the faction so called "strengths".

For example TR was supposed to have highest RoF on weps, but most of the weps dont actually have higher RoF than other factions and the few that does, its only miniscule amount of faster.

Same goes for other faction strengths. Why the hell advertize faction perks if they are not gonna be used?

They go slightly slower but also have 20% magazine size. I made a post about this already, lemme go try and find it.