Stats stats stats and stats ! NC hardmode version 2

?

Magrider still better at farming infantry than what? The Prowler? No. It has lower KPU.

Better than the Vanguard at farming infantry? Yes, like I said, and you quoted, the Vanguard is the worst at farming infantry.

But if you're in a 2/2 AT Vanguard, there is no excuse to lose a straight up fight against another tank. There just isn't. With the damage you can soak up, you need to be a horrible shot or make very bad decisions to lose that engagement. If you both hit the same amount of shots, and the Vanguard driver knows how to use the shield, the other tank is dead.

If you can't do decisive damage in those 8 seconds of invulnerability (that's what, 2-3 AP rounds and 8 Enforcer rounds?), you're either a bad shot, or you didn't use the shield correctly. If you land those shots with your shield up, there is no coming back from that kind of damage for any tank, and certainly not for one with less hp than a shieldless Vanguard.

If you think a shielded Vanguard is overall inferior, you're just not very good at tanking. And in that case, even 30 seconds of invulnerability every 45 seconds will not save you.

Personally I think the comparing of categories of weapons mean about jack all in playing the combined arms game, the only hard set categories that matter to a player is "Can my [insert class here] use it?"

I understand why we try to find a pared down category so we can feel we are comparing apples to apples here but when you get out in the AO, the only thing that matters to capturing the objective is enough overwhelming force that your side can stay on it for the allotted amount of time and you have to decide ahead of time what you are going to be carrying near that objective and that is limited by the class you choose. The carbine, shotgun, assault rifle, sub machine guns, etc categories are just arbitrary labels, only can my class carry it into the capture objective AO and be effective there matters.

You can and should compare the weapons your character class can carry, there is no manipulating the stats there. You're quibbling over what is essentially semantics if you insist you have to compare only like effective ranges. It just doesn't pan out that way in the game, long vs short vs medium effective range weapons all clash at the same time, there are no limits put upon our infantry classes short of ammo if there isn't a engineer ammo pack or terminal close by.

...

That said, could anyone show me how to compare the average Assist KDR of each faction's players?

AP Magrider is still better then the AP Vanguard and i don't think most of the players choose AP for infantry farming.

Stats don't show this at all. Stats show that the Vanguard is overall inferior:

Prowler AP KPU: 188.2
Magrider AP KPU: 184.2
Vanguard AP KPU: 146.5

TANK ES secondaries according to stats:

AV secondaries: Saron > Enforcer = Vulcan
AI secondaries: PPA > Marauder > Enforcer Mod.

stats show NC use lightnings to kill infantry, vanguard is the superior AT tank.

You cannot separate things like that.

You cannot say "traits are fine as they are coded but other game code makes them inferior"- that just does not make much sense.

NC were considered OP in beta (I would not really know as I was playing VS at that time) and they got a big nerf across the board iirc just before release. Yet, this nerf had nothing to do with range compression or the design of the maps- funny how that works.

NC "traits" do not suck- no "trait" can really "suck" if things are balanced they should just be different flavors. For instance, we have to weigh things like the inherent advantages of alpha damage and the inherent advantages of ROF and the inherent advantages of no bullet drop.

If having no bullet drop increases the effectiveness of weapon X by 10% and decreasing the ammo in the mag by 10% decreases the effectiveness of the weapon by 10% then if we want to apply no bullet drop to the weapon and have it's resulting performance remain the same we know that 1 way to do this is to decrease the ammo in the mag by 10%. Of course, these are all hypothetical values and this example is overly simplified but hopefully you see where I am going.

The ROF*Damage per shot equation is no different. If we find that a weapon with 1.40x the damage per shot (approximately 200/143) but .66x the ROF (approximately 500/750) and .75x the amount of ammo in the magazine is performing a lot worse than it is 143@750 with 40 round mag counterpart then the problem is not that the trait of damage per shot sucks, the problem is that you have not balanced the formula that translates this into an equality in performance. It tells us only that 1.4x + .66y + .75z =/= x + y + z. We can, and should, adjust this equation until we find greater equality in performance. For instance, we could make the equation 1.6x + .66y + .75z and see if that gets closer to equity. If not, we can always adjust it further or reduce the change we have made.

TLDR- your statement makes no sense.

actually range compression wasn't half the problem it is now, since bases weren't defendable and tanks were so strong a significant amount of battles were field based, I'd say the majority of fights I played in the first month were outside of a base.

things have changed that have inhibited this, therefor it is either the changes to blame or the fact that your stuff didn't change to accommodate them.

Lightning HE KPU: VS = NC > TR
Pls show me stats that prove the Vanguard is superior at anything.

get bankrotas to fetch the vehicles killed stats. talk to literally any high BR NC tanker (especially klyptok)
no matter what since all tank cannons one shot infantry it will always be whoever puts out the most shots, thats just how it works thats what 90% of kpu describes and thats what makes it a shallow comparison. The vanguard literally can not lose a fair fight unless you're an idiot. hell If a magrider sneaks up behind a vanguard and unloads a 6 shot saron burst +fpc, if the driver can react in the next 3 seconds he can still kill the magrider. If you want an example you should look for calisai's mag videos in which a 1/2 vangaurd took away half his health even though he surprised him and had a gunner.

What?! So, basically, not only is it okay that NC counterparts under perform compared to the weapons they are attempting to emulate but it is also okay that other factions' NC counterparts perform better than the NC weapons they are attempting to emulate?

The answer, by the way, to this second question, is no.

How do they perform in comparison, TR>VS>NC (Jaguar>Serpent>GD-7F).

Ah, okay, so AMC compared to VX87 compared to AXC-11, TR>VS>NC.

Any more questions?

You are still basically saying that it is perfectly acceptable for the TR traits of high ROF*low damage per shot + greater mag ammo to completely outshine the NC traits of low ROF*high damage per shot and I cannot fathom why you think this is okay.

Even if the GD-7F = Jaguar in performance you are still saying "its fine that the people who want more damage per shot get screwed for wanting this because the weapons with high damage per shot greatly under perform compared to those with low damage per shot and high ROF and it should be that way".

You either A) cannot be serious or B) cannot be reasoned with on matters of balance.

Once again, that doesn't prove that there is a problem with the weapons. It could just as easily be the players that NC attracts. The only thing it shows for certain is that there is a problem of some sort.

I saw a video where a guy killed a lots of ppl with the Enforcer Mod.

I believe you but stats don't show this at all.
Stats show that the Vanguard is overall inferior even in a hands of a BR75+ NC.

Level 75-100 KPU:
Prowler AP: 282.8
Magrider AP: 272.5
Vanguard AP: 215.9

what part of the majority of KPU is infantry kills escapes you? I can kill 40 vanguards and get 0 kills if I'm unlucky. They aren't the same and you can't treat them the same.

Well ok.. The Hypothesis.. NC weapons underperform.. The data says.. no they dont NC weapons have a higher KPU .

So there is a possibility that the data is flawed but just trawling through the data and posting the bits that seem to agree with your conclusion is pretty flawed.

The data from last winter tells the same overall story as the current data. NC getting boned. Your hypothesis faces disconfirming information. Try again.

Even if you were right about this how does this not still lead directly to the conclusion that the way the game is constructed requires that various NC weapons need adjusting in order to provide for a balanced game? Or we need to reconstruct the entire game to balance the weapons? Either way, the conclusion is the same, the game is constructed in a fashion that has substantial differences in performance among the factions.

You keep arguing this fact, you keep shrinking your hypotheses, you continue to be incorrect and dodge the issue, and why? Why is it so hard for your ego to admit that there are hard coded elements of the game that make the NC under performing?

Furthermore, if range compression was the issue then as I showed you upon request earlier in this very thread why would the long range NC option fail when compared to the long range TR/VS options meanwhile the short range NC options fails when compared to the short range TR/VS options? Both of these cannot hold and yet provide evidence that is not contradictory to your hypothesis.

So you are saying that TR and VS tankers escape alive more often when attacked by a AP Vanguard?

So you are saying the AP Magrider's KPU is higher because it is better at infantry farming then the AP Vanguard?

Holy crap! You are right, not the same thing but every vehicle is in the exact same situation.

This appears to be another "yeah, Vanguard sucks at dealing with infantry" and that is true and even if we suppose that this is okay because they Vanguard is that much better at destroying other tanks then there is still the issue related to score (you know, XP, the only real reward the game provides). Post-nerf Prowler was outscoring the Vanguard by 20% and post-nerf Magrider was outscoring it by about 17%. That's balanced though right? I mean, you're NC so you deserve to get less rewards because you're hardcoded that way. Perhaps a different balance issue but it seems it would not be very difficult to apply modifiers to the XP gain based on whether you are vehicle killing infantry or vehicle killing vehicle.

Yes, yes you can. So long as the battle field isn't just two tanks staring at each other at the exact same moment of possible perception, you most certainly can include the KPU because it reflects all the impacts on it that would result in fewer kills. If the other tanks are getting a higher KPU because they kill more infantry - that means they are killing more users of C4, Tank Mines, AV Launchers, AV Turrets, AV MAXes...

Knowing that and saying that means they are not as good as the lowest KPU scoring tank in a fair fight? What fair fights!?

You're weapon of choice is either overwhelming with the help of your team and someone on your side gets the kill or its not and you end up on their side's kill counter. What is escaping you regarding this?

You're trying to discredit stats with anecdotal evidence of outlier examples of great gameplay on the part of a NC dynamic duo (with supporting logistics and other forms of players covering their 6 o'clock) with out realizing that the stats already take your example in as just one subset of the data pulled along the entire bell curve of possible outcomes.

We're comparing one faction's bell curve to the other factions bell curves here, the numbers pulled are the peak of that bell curve, the median, the average. Citing above average examples for the discredit of a low average or a below average example from an individual player's stats to discredit that player's observations is a narrow view of the entire picture KPU helps us paint of the health of the balance in PS2.

You have no idea what you are talking about.

NC do just fine if not better than other factions when using weapons that are carbon copies in terms of stats. How does this have anything to do with what kind of players play what factions?

You and your assumptions are both offensive.

Leave the data analysis to people who know what they are talking about then because there is a problem and for anyone who knows something about data analysis it is pretty clear.

http://4.bp.************/-N1C0YOnHvPk/UMAGf2PcCiI/AAAAAAAAFjI/DdsdOEs0XFk/s320/Annoyed-facepalm-picard-l.png
I'm saying that even on a really good run you can get very few kills,
This is a run I had a while ago

now I got a kpu added of 3, can you guess how many tanks/vehicles I killed?
1 vulcan harasser, 2 lightnings and a prowler.
gee why don't I have 6 kills listed?
both those NC were lightnings who bailed and tried to c4 me, the TR guy was from the back of the harasser and the driver bailed and redployed, the prowler doesn't even show up because the gunner and driver both bailed and as I was about to kill them I got jumped by a vanguard.
you can't rely on kpu for vehicle kills.

yes the mag ap is better at killing infantry repeatedly, the van ap is easier to hit with but over time the reload speed adds up.

Oh so it is OK that the TR Tanks can farm infantry, which generates them certs for upgrades and also places those players into spawn ques, which takes them out of the action, thus helping the TR Infantry...