K/D All servers all factions.(repost from reddit).

As simple as I said it 3x before:
No highly mobile or Armored spammable AI option in the field.

That's where the Enforcer C85 Modified (where most of us forumside ppl asked for a fix since ever) or Halberds and straight shotgun on maxes fail compared to Marauder/PPA/ to some extend Vulcan or ZOE MAX.

It all ends up with the usual spawn camp where TR/VS vehicle spam weapons are just better at "farming" and scoring individual kills.

I say it again one viable field AI option for the NC would bring this small issue down to a non issue.

Remodeling the C85m to a on 70-100m accurate canister shot semi auto shotgun with a AOE on impact. Low impact damage like 180-200 on direct hits but 8 fragments dealing 60 AOE damage each (480 in total) in a 1.5-2m radius 1 dmg on 2.5-3m with a 10 shot kinda quick reload mag? That's 2-3 hits/near hits for a kill and could do the trick.

I did L2P, I struggled with my starter NC guns even after having years of experience with FPS games. My idea of struggling might be different than others since I have pretty high expectations of myself, meaning a 2.0K/D is me being rather awful, like rage inducing awful, but that's just me. It is no coincidence that I can leroy, or throw myself into waves of enemies as VS and still maintain an overall 4.0+ K/D with infantry only, no maxes at all with over 18k kills and VERY few revives since it's solo or 2 man squad gameplay (I also don't mindlessly zerg or go to under defended facilities), but as NC, I have to work twice as hard and exercise caution in order to do 1/2 as well, TR isn't much different, as TR I can play as if I were VS and still do good. There are countless times that I can recall going toe to toe with some nooblet VS chars who have crap stats and almost or sometimes do kill me with my 1k Anchor when they are using a free Orion. It is not a L2P issue, I check other peoples stats occasionally and the majority of people are crap with crap accuracy and you can tell that they have very little situational awareness or gun skills when you face them in game, yet they do much better than the NC scrubs when I'm playing VS or TR.

Basically since we all know that the NC are more situational when it comes to engagement ranges, you are stating that the NC can only perform well in situations 1+2, while the other factions can perform well in 1+2+3+4, yet they are all equal? It doesn't add up to me.

Thanks for the huge response but did you read my whole text or just quote the part where you could argue?
If you had read the whole text I said there is a missing link for the NC and thats the Infanterie "farmability" outside of CQC range.

I know what you're talking about, my first char is a NC and I still play it often, but I never felt inferior or outmatched and I'm a solo/duo person too with a average 2.3-4.1 KD across all my chars.
I don't have a huge KD on my own as I'm the Harasser driver person so my gunner (on all 3 factions the same guy) ends up with 90% of the kills and yes we are on TR/VS more effective as we can use marauder/vulcan/ppa situational to farm very easy kills (and not have to rely on Fury/Halberd all the time) no matter who we're up against.

(oh and to be honest the part that you quoted was bait to find out if JackD was a fail troll, and he did me the favor to confirm it.)

I get revived more as NC since I'm not lonewolfing as much as I do when I play the other two factions (though I did spend as much time with platoons as lonewolfing, so half and half, survivability is much higher in platoons). But yeah, I ran similar results. I ran TR/VS for alerts and using vehicles. I didn't use their maxes however, but that is because I thought it would skew the results a bit (VS/TR maxes can engage outside CQC ranges where NC Max can't for the most part).

Point I'm making is I do much much better with an uncerted (no Nanoweave, using iron sights, no mines, lockons, ect) BR1 character VS/TR than I do on a certed out BR55. In addition a buddy of mine who is a noob to not only PS2, but FPS in general (minus Unreal Tournament and Goldeneye/N64), did better than average trying out the other factions.

I don't know if I agree with this, my experience is mostly infantry vs infantry. But I'm not going to say you are wrong. I just don't think it directly relates to what I am trying to point out.

Well certainly we're agreed that we have to be smart about how we analyze average KPH numbers, but that's why I suggest we basically only compare weapons whose roles match.

The first reason to do this is as we've both said: infantry weapon timers keep running even though you're in a vehicle. This results in significantly weaker Avg KPH for weapons used by the most common classes found in vehicles (Engineer Carbines, basically.) It also has a lesser effect for all other weapons, since some people get into their vehicles as non-engineers, and others get into vehicles for transport or gunning purposes.

The second reason to do this is the nature of different battle conditions. Weapons just have lower KPH when fighting at range, so long-ranged weapons naturally worse KPH. So when we do something like compare a Gauss SAW (long-ranged LMG) with an Orion (short-range) we need to stop doing that, and instead compare the Orion with a short-ranged weapon like the Anchor or EM1.

As for your "We see there's a difference, but how much does that difference matter?" comment (which is a great point), we should definitely consider overall usage frequency since that tells us how frequently the mis-match comes into play.

Actually it starts to create an interesting picture when you look up the stats.

Avg KPH (short-ranged weapons):

1. SVA-88 (30.2) balanced
2. Anchor (26.4) short
3. EM6 (25.9) balanced (short)
4. EM1 (25.7) short
5. Orion (22.2) balanced (short)

Avg KPH (long-ranged weapons):

1. Ursa (25.5) long
2. TMG-50 (21.8) long
3. Gauss SAW (20.6) long

Unique players using the weapon (which I believe carries a 100-kill minimum before you get tracked):

1. Gauss SAW (13.2k)
2. Orion (9.9k)
3. TMG-50 (5.7k)
4. EM6 (3.6k)
5. SVA-88 (2.6k)
6. EM1 (2.2k)
7. Anchor (1.7k)
8. Ursa (1.5k)

Really it seems like the next step is to create better apples-to-apples comparisons in terms of player skill, since you can see a clear correlation between the high-use weapons having worse average KPHs (because there are more newbies dragging it down.) Ideally we would figure out a way to compare similarly skilled groups of players with one another (although the two methods I can think of just off the top of my head both have significant shortcomings.)

Sorry about the almost offtopic divergence into stats, I got curious.

Well let me explain it how it relates

As VS/TR you don't die as often to AI Vehicle weapons as on NC (leave out biofarms). VS and TR got the better high mobility farm options and that's giving you a better K/D even if you play 99% infanterie vs infanterie on other factions. NC just lack at medium/long range fire support that can clear lot's of infanterie in a short time. (Make it simple: you die 2-3 times from AI weapons and on the push to the objective you face 20 enemy soldiers instead of 10, thats a big hit to any KD)

I play NC almost daily and on the infanterie side I don't see a problem expect we try to push on open terrain vs a equal force that got AI vehicle support.
Give the NC a good fire support weapon on Max or a as I suggested on vehicles and you will see how the stats normalize all of a sudden.

Well the +/- 4-5% difference on the servers that are tracked by stats.dasanfall.com for more thene a month (US Servers) are allready a good signe that SOE isn't that far away from a pretty good asymetrical balance. If they give NC a viable long/medium AI option it should be at +/-3% KDR or less.

You even got +/- 2-10% on red vs blue in Q3 TDM if the same 2 "as good" clans played the same map 10 times in a row as training match where everything beside the team color is equal Yea thats where I started to play Multiplayer FPS...

Hah look at Cobalt. I told you vanu is exceptionally good there and NC is worst. What is surprising though is that Ceres NC has lower than Cobalt!

I think this has something to do with NC's color scheme.

I've said it all along and many people say it doesn't matter, but ninja black is generally harder too see than baby blue and bright alert purple.

People think its all about the weapons, but the weapons only come into play when you are shooting, and there is a lot more to K/D than shooting.

Splitting hairs over 0.1 KDR over hundreds of thousands of kills, deaths and man hours played. Good work OP. You're now ready to be a doctorate grade statistician.

On a side note: Briggs TR represent! My suspicions appear true (by these same stats I just finished mocking less than 12 seconds ago) that Briggs TR are a cut above the rest. Watch your backs Cobalt...

It is truly funny how the "NC needs a buff" people try to just shush down any other reasons but gear as the main issue because of the lower AVARAGE kd.

Surely it is because of the gear that NC on our server (Cobalt) for example is the least organized of them all. TR has it, VS has it, NC has big zergs and few outfits trying to keep the herd together. Take the feedback or not, it just shows your own personal quality if you can process it or just rebuke it with some ********.

People choose their faction based on many things, one being the "feel and image". NC feel and image is not something that promotes great teamplay in a TEAMPLAY based game.

NC starter weapons are worse at cqc in the hands of nubs. The saw is hilarious for new players.

Make Anchor default NC LMG, make the Carnage BR default NC medic gun, guess leave the mercenary as the GD7f is too niche and NC would improve.

Also increase our ADS movement accuracy and done.

There is little that can explain this other than weapon disbalance. SOE should be balancing weapons, ESFs and MBTs to stats rather than forum whining. They are in fact MUCH more accurate and scientific than how anyone 'feels' about the current balance.

It's 15% on most servers, you can say what you will but dead last on every single server is significant. Statistically proving a problem.
If balance was even close nc would be at least 2nd on one of then. Jesus are you people that afraid of the devs fixing some broken aspects of the game that you want nc held Down?

If we're going to talk about "feel and image" we might as well talk about all the Factions
Lets see
NC
- Freedumbs
- Burgers
- Space 'Merica

TR
- Storm Trooper wannabes
- Space Commies
- Red and Black edge

VS
- Skin tight Spandex
- Purple
- Dildos

Now one of two things can happen.
People can retract the claim that different Factions draw different types of people and accept that the problem is something more than skill.
Or
We can continue down this course and start flinging **** at each other until someone gets banned (again).

I think there is a perfectly valid, logical and reproducible reason for the stats in the OP, but I can't tell you without getting a raised finger by one of the mods!

So you're saying 300000 players all neatly separated themselves into three distinct groups of skill level based upon the aesthetics of the factions? That is more believable to you than there are balance issues in the game?

I think I see what you are saying. I agree that it would help to have a bit of a AI weapon to use in those situations. There was a time when the reaver rocket pods filled that roll, but then everyone got certs/SC.

One thing we have forgotten about is the proposed changes to Nanoweave upcoming. Thats going to change things up quite a bit I think and I'm unsure how every faction will fair with that.

You could possibly divide players by BR. But for low BR that would be only possible for TR/VS comparision. NC have completly different starter guns compared to TR/VS. From what i remember looking at some older stats NC newbies have horrbile KPU then its getting much more even for higer BR players.
Also TR/VS are slower to out-grow their HA guns. Their firearms progress is much more linear.
For NC you start with a medium/long range low ROF, high recoil ADS gun. SAW is soo bad at CQB that you should change it ASAP. You upgrade to a gun that has completly different requirements in terms of playstyle and skill. To make it worse NC had no way to learn this playstyle and skill requirements instead he already has habbits that put him at disadvantage when using this kind of gun. I still catch myself sometimes wasting valuable TTK trying to ADS first or burst firing using guns that allow me to just hipfire in CQB. To draw better comparision as NC you start with a 2H sword when fighting guys with 1 handed swords in tight corridors. Once you get used to get the best of it you are given 1 handed sword while 1 handed sword just gets a sharper,better balanced one.

You laugh at people saying faction audio/visual style has nothing to do with anything, but my experience while playing Miller NC says otherwise. Unless up to a half of them suddenly decided to roleplay drunken rednecks that have no idea their sunderer has guns on it, I have no idea how that unproportionate amount of newbie players running around like headless chickens came to be.

No percentage is irrelevant, it simply cannot be, because it is what it is, a percentage.

Whatever you work for, 4% below inflation wage "increases" wouldn't be fun, and would get much less fun every year.

Or imagine if your trust fund shrank 4% a year.