It's been nerfed already. There's a point where you can only nerf a weapon so much before it becomes literally worthless. The difference is that NC generally only pull their maxes when their weapon can be used in it's ideal range. That's why it scores so high. Sometimes, you just can't nerf a weapon because the playerbase loves to sprint right into the meat grinder.
he said that mattherson TR were doing the best in an interview, then laughed and corrected himself by saying VS were the strongest on mattherson.
When you combine that with what he said about Air in the section after ZOE discussion, you'll see he was talking about skill ceiling for playing. Which means those who are new won't have certed ESF's and therefore won't be able to stand up against the good high rank pilots. So unless you're making the assumption that people will purposely get in ESF's to immediately get shot down and get very unhappy (i.e. people like to get mad and unhappy), then no you're wrong. The reality is that piloting takes a LOT of time to get good at in this game because the skills for flying don't directly come from other games like BF3 or WoP. This is because these are VTOL's and not planes as well as the fact that they can pull of insane maneuvers like reverse flying. This stuff takes a lot of time to get good at using in combat. I've got over 30 hours flying and I'm marginal at dog fighting. I'm not saying you can't be a BR10 and rip a BR90 alive but it's not very likely simply due to the fact that his plane will be better kitted than yours even if you used SC to buy the rotary and pods. Getting your plane to a good fighting place takes at least a thousand certs, probably more. Long story short, yes those higher levels do end up skewing the data. I'm a statistician with a background in data analytics. So unless you have a PhD. in Stats or a Stats related field (signal processing, econometrics, etc.), please don't tell me how averages work. You're talking about averages while I'm signaling towards the distribution as a whole.
Yes, please explain how we are supposed to read those stats. Surprisingly little information on that page tbh. When was the SOE database last polled to get the info ? I see hacksaws at numbers 1 and 2 both with different stats, is that left and right arms ? I see the Mercy at 3 and 6, are players favouring one arm over the other ? If that is what the dual entries for each weapon means of course. And out of the top 10 guns, VS have 4, TR have 3 and NC have 3. So what is that supposed to mean, where is the time frame ? You provide a link to a 3rd party site that hooks into the SOE DB and state FACT, and then expect us to just say, "ohh well there is a web page up that shows that the head man at SOE is wrong, lets just believe the web page" No thanks, I'll listen to Higby and SOE's stats first, but thanks anyway for trying. Have a nice day.
btw, he is totally right that the real issue with the ZOE is that so many VS use them now. The amount of VS in a zone using zoe is ridiculous. Even though part of this is "new toy" syndrome, the real reason is that zoe maxes can keep up with infantry basically due to their increased speed. you pull a zoe and you are basically a much more powerful HA with none of the draw backs of being a max (save the resource cost) you be trollin
Honestly, I get the jab at the lancer/vortex complaints, and that would be fine if the other empires didn't get equivalent additions which were much much better in damage and utility than the Lancer and Vortexes. Having something which shines in a niche vs something which is much more powerful and has a seriously wide utility...let's just say the complaints were just, and I'm completely in support of people who refused to buy those weapons with SC. Then came ZOE, and I thought "well.....maybe it is just our turn to have something which is simply better than TR and NC equivalents." Of course TR and NC don't see it like that, but then they rarely(/never) are given a less powerful piece of kit relative to the VS, the feeling is alien, and horrifying to them. So naturally, they are far less resilient to people telling them to "try x/y/z/ out for a week".
1- How should I know? 2- Why is the statement relevant to him? 3- It was one of many jab higby takes at VS and TR. Why would one person response to it be of particular interest? 4- If you want to know, ask him.
The fact that this interview happened at all is a good reason for Higby to be immediately fired. In pretty much any other industry, he would be.
Easy, it was meant as a joke. I couldn't care less about what jabs Higby makes, or what Buzz thinks in return.
"Las0m: VS players are funny Las0m: they don't use stuff unless it's obviously OP" Man, that damage drop off sure used to be OP! Its a good thing they got rid of that, now people will finally buy into the NS weapons. Did you know that the Magrider's HEAT cannon is OP? Neither did I! Magriders themselves must have been seriously OP, it took them three four balance passes to finally force the VS Tankists into the Lightning full time. And OH MAN, DAT SCYTHE. Totes OP, that gigantic profile it gives the enemy is super imbalanced or something. Doubly so for the PPA and photon pods, its not as if there's a balance feature built right into either of those. Yeah, those VS sure love to bandwagon. Good thing the TR and NC didn't all rush out to buy fractures, ravens, enforcers, and marauders to spam when those came out. And those HE rounds, must have been thepesky VS that got those nerfed into the ground. Add another OP car to the Mag train, HE rounds, man, what a killer still. TL;DR: You crap on (as opposed to balancing) our faction for the better part of a year THIS is the **** you fling now? WTF.
In what way though? How are these stats produced? Do they actually record the daily points, or are they taking the total cumulative statistics since launch and dividing it by the number of days since launch which would lead to incredibly false statements about various weapons effectiveness, and therefore utterly irrelevant?
