A Statistical Comparison: TR's T32 Bull vs VS's SVA-88

It is the right gun. Bull, Anchor and SVA-88 are supposed to fill the same niche it's just that SVA-88 has all the best stats.

It's not balanced but who cares that much really.

Flare is the VS S LMG because it has extended mags upgrade.

To add to this and be completely fair:


Both the CARVs are horrifically niche weapons WITH attachments. They're crap without attachments. With a laser, okay in CQC hipfire between RoF and bullet capacity (effectively, they work because they form lasting bullet walls,) but the MSW-R is so much more efficient before even needing the laser. With a fore-grip (+comp in -S' case) okay in the ranged department, but just about any other TR LMG will do as well if not better without attachments, the CARVs just have the DPS and again, ammo capacity.

So, yeah... they're effectively $#!%. Niche effective $#!%, but mostly just $#!%. Equip something more appropriate for the situation or glue yourself to a terminal. About the only effective solutions for the CARVs.

I don't see that at all. The Bull is meant to be a highly controllable gun that trades ROF and ammo capacity for moving ADS accuracy. It is most comparable to the NS-15M, EM1, or Polaris (the Polaris/EM1 doesn't give up ammo capacity though). The T16 is similar to those weapons but is more long-range focused while the Bull is more midrange movement focused.

The SVA-88, CARV-S, Pulsar LSW, and EM6 are more short-to-midrange weapons with moderate to high ROF but accuracy or COF issues. The TR probably has it worst here in that the CARV-S is more in league with the LSW which is clearly not as good as the SVA-88.

The Orion, MSW-R, and Anchor are short-range weapons with excellent on-the-move accuracy. The Orion has the best movement in ADS of the three but the worst attachments as it gets neither an Advanced Laser nor SPA.

Yep, as peopls said, T32 is polaris equivalents.

But compare Carv-S and the SVA-88 or the pulsar LSW now.

TR have no all rounder LMGs.

you have no idea what you are talking about. Carv-s is one of the worst LMG in the game. Oh wait, you ain't TR, that's probably why.

I've been here since Beta and the gun has had its ups and down, including two months where Single Fire was seriously bugged. I've had my extended mag rambo moments and so forth. But it really is the worst TR LMG in terms of performance (not purely attachments options). The extend mag doesn't make up for it. It's the worst LMG when comparing it to the current flow of battle (ranges, situations, etc). The T32, which I think needs a revamp since I feel like it is a bit lost, out does the Carv-S in what matters. The T32 is NOT a good step from the Carv. The MSW-R does that range better and also has 4 magazines rather than 3 like the Bull plus a big ROF advantage. The Bull is close-to-medium gun and the T16 is a medium-to-long gun (attachment based) but at the point you'd want the Bull laser & SP ammo, you're better off with the MSW-R, Carv or SMG (you can still do it, I just mean, it's less efficient). The Gauss Saw S is no where near the worst, it's a pretty good gun. It's not "worse" just because the EM6 is popular. They're both great choices actually; it's like having two flavors of the TMG-50. The Carv-S is blatantly & clearly not the most accurate, it's the worst in accuracy. A great player can use any weapon but I honestly think right now it's just a weapon to get Auraxium with, if you're a Medal collector.

This is just my opinion though from using it since Launch (first gun I bought and also got all the attachments) and had 815 kills before I put it away. Trust me, I want to love this gun, it's been with me for a long time. But there are more efficient options.

The T16 Rhino & T32 are meant to be the all-rounders.

The SVA-88 is balanced for consoles, where its high recoil will matter to anyone.

T16 lacks of DPS to be okay at close range and is designed for mid to long range without getting 2X scopes or compensator while T32 is worst than NS-15M (stats and attachements).

I do better at every ranges whith the TMG than with thoses weapons.

I logged in just to make this comment.

You just said that the T32 has lower recoil and faster reload speed while the SVA has +15 ammo per mag.

You are also saying that the T32, the TR weapon, is considered underpowered relatively to the VS one, the SVA.

You basically said that having more ammo is better than having lower recoil and faster reload speed.

Having more ammo is TR trait, while having lower recoil and faster reload speed is a VS one.

Well that's it, gentlemen. A TR admitted that TR weapons are clearly OP compared to the VS counterparts (except in this case).

I will remember this topic for ever and ever, and this shall not be forgotten in the mists of time.

(Of course I'm joking, I just want to point out the hypocrisy a lot of people have, especially here in the forums)

Cool, now compare TR carbines to VS carbines.

I rest my case.

All-Rounder means decent in close, medium and long but not great at anyone in particular. If a weapon is really good at something, it is not an all-rounder, it is specialized. It's not optimal at close range but it's a good gun in the sense you don't need to swap out all the time just to be in the fight properly, know what I mean? That's what the T16 is and at least what the T32 was meant to be (it was much better before the attachment nerfs & tweaks). If the T16 isn't an all-rounder then I don't know what TR LMG is. None of them would be all rounders then, in my opinion.

At the very least, the T32 should get one more magazine though.

The NS-15M is just as good or better.

I have a TR character, but I also have non-TR characters, which makes me realize just how much TR tend to fail to realize how good they have it. If the CARV-S is one of your worst LMGs, you don't know how good you've got it. I'm not saying it's the best TR LMG (that's probably the MSW-R, which is excellent even well beyond its supposed effective range), but it isn't bad and it has its niches (which are niches, I didn't say it was the best thing ever, but it has them).

Are TR LMGs, on the whole, probably more lackluster than the other factions outside of the MSW-R? Probably; I tend to use the NS-15M more for field fighting as TR, because it's basically as good as or better than the T16 and T32 for those purposes. Is that a problem? No, because their LMGs are not actually bad and asymmetric balance exists. TR has an enormous advantage in carbines and ARs: 40 round magazines, 750rpm stock guns, only non-NS 75% ADS carbines, highest ROF AR, great weapons like the Jaguar/TAR/SABR-13, and probably the most competitive -S weapon going in the T1S Cycler.

Are the Orion and SVA-88 probably better in most respects than any TR LMG? Yeah, probably. Does that mean the TR should get an equivalent? Right around the time the VS and NC get weapons with +33% average ammo capacity and 75% ADS carbines. The Vanu might indeed have the best LMGs in the game. They suffer in other areas. It's not balanced within the class, but SOE hasn't ever said it needs to be.

It's obvious we will never get anywhere with this. Like hell, I'm currently playing on my NC toon and ******* loving the LMGs and Carbines and NC complain about them all-the-time. The 30 rounds on my GD-23 has not been an issue for me and I mainly use it in CQB, even though it's a longer range carbine (not efficient but still enjoying it). It's always going to be subjective and/or have a placebo effect probably. But either way, we have 6 TR LMGs, the worst one is the Carv-S; that's my statement.

Second statement being on repeat: T32 should have one more magazine (a.k.a. step back from the weird nerf it got).

Again, I think the Bull is worse because it's 1000 certs/700 SC to be worse than the NS-15M. The CARV-S at least can do stuff that can't be done with a common pool gun. I'm not saying that makes it the king, but it might make it not-the-worst. I'd even probably argue against the T16, but it at least has something no other 652rpm LMG gets in an Advanced Grip, which gives it an area of performance where it arguably beats even the NS-15M.

And yes, I agree, NC whine too much about their stuff as well. Although the whining about the GD-7F is probably justified of late, but you'd think at times they pretend no other carbines exist but that gun (certainly not the default Mercenary, a totally free 167/600 carbine!).

Only way you could compare SVA-88 with carv s is if you sort a spreadsheet of LMGs by rof and take that as categorisation. S weapons are weapons that unique attachments. In the case of LMGs they are the ones the that get access to extended magazines.

Bull is only more controllable than SVA-88, in a way, because it has a lower rate of fire. There are a whole list of more highly controllable type LMGs that can be classes as "Orion like." SVA-88 falls into the group with tighter hipfire and moving cone of fire. It even has the 0.75 ads movement speed which is excellent for this type of weapon.

T16, EM6 and Pulsar LSW are all mediocre accuracy on the move which makes them more "T9 Carv like."

But Gauss SAW is the only "God SAW like" weapon.

I am consistently stunned that so many people want all weaponry to be the same across factions. As if THIS is what is causing you to lose 1 on 1.

I mean, let's be honest. The only reason so many whine is because they think they're getting the short end of the stick and so find small details so they can yell "SEE, THIS is why so-and-so faction is OP!".

It will never cease to amaze me.

If we follow this absurd notion of "fairness" the factions will just devolve into red, blue and purple teams.

I play all factions and have a consistent above average k/d.

If I play faction one, I use different tactics to combat faction 2... and I like it. There are so many bad players out there that these inconsistencies are IRRELEVANT to your game experience and yet add a little flavor to play styles.

I for one DO NOT want an absolutely "fair" game of matched sides.

Do you want the game to devolve into a small map, small unit, identically equiped match with the only difference being frame rate, internet lag or how fast you can smash the keyboard?

For crying out loud folks...

It's true about the cert cost, but for the longest the Carv-S was also 1000 certs. When the T32 was introduced in the December GU01, people actually really liked it. It was probably the most accurate TR LMG at the time. But now I agree, it's not worth the 1000. It should at least be put at 750 certs.

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

I wish they'd come up with another damage tier for LMGs for more variety. Currently it's 143, 167 and 200. I think 155 with appropriate stats would be an interesting tier for the T32 Bull; at least to make it different enough.

167 is 5.98 hits to kill 1000.
155 would be 6.45 hits to kill 1000.
143 is 6.99 hits to kill 1000.
Headshot 2x multiplier would be 155 = 310, compared to 143 = 286
((so in this case it would be a great EXP finisher compared to 167, and a better killer than 143))

Well if you want to improve as a player knowing which equipment is good and bad is an essential step. There is no being "colour blind" about all factions and weapons being exactly equal in different ways.

Then every long range weapon (Ursa, SAW, SAW-S-s, T16, TMG-50 , ACX-11, T5AMC, PulsaC, Reaper DMR, Corvus, CME, SABR-13) and low DPS CQC broken weapons (polaris, EM-1, T32) are all rouder since your definition.
Isn't it?

That's what i told you, the only supposed TR all rounder is the Carv-s and it's stats are far inferior to EM6, Pulsar-LSW or the SA-88.
This weapons have the worst overall recoil per sec of all LMGs(vertical and horizontal), get 2 sec longer recoils than pulsar/SVA for 25 more ammos and 0.6 longer reload than the EM6 with lower damage tier. It also get the worst COFs.

At least, the corvus and the ACX-11 (the worst AR/Carabines) get corrects alternatives for them roles.