Lynx 2.0 is good. However, Lynx 1.0 should be brought back.

So do I understand this correctly that the lynx still has the CoF bloom and the recoil of a 143 damage weapon?

Pretty much. We don't know exact recoil stats, though.

Can you make a thread about this? I don't have the charm you possess.

I guess we could try to raise awareness to this fact, but whether this will attract the attention of the devs is always a gamble.

I could make a thread, but I really would like to see proper recoil stats first.

I know it's directional recoil value (if it didn't change) is 9(or8)/10 dropped from 35/40 (as far as I remember).

If you can't kill people at all ranges with the Cougar I feel bad for you and question your LA credentials.

On the contrary, people place far too much emphasis on RPM. Other factors matter more. Vonic farms folks on Mattherson with the NS-11C just as efficiently as he farms folks with his beloved VX6-7. Why? Because the NS-11C is a really good weapon. The Cougar and Razor are competitive with the Mercenary, even if they shoot about 1 round less per second; any competent LA should have no problem with that. Ideal TTKs are within the span of half a second for almost every weapon in this game, the adjustment times alone are not going to always give you an edge unless you're prefiring (which you'd likely only do with something like the MCG).

The blistering rates of fire on the Serpent and GD-7F may feel good, but for every high there's a low, and that low is reload time. It's fairly difficult to hit short reloads on 143/30 guns and pretty trivial on 40-mag or 167 damage guns. The Lynx has a faster and more efficient short reload (which it has an easier time hitting) and a more efficient long reload, which is important in maintaining throughput and uptime when you're oh you know in close quarters where you want that to stay the case (I feel the same way about the Cyclone vs. the GD-7F but that's another story). It can get almost an additional kill per magazine. It has a faster TTK when getting headshots. It's more accurate at range. For this, it trades a miniscule edge at point-blank magdumping, which is a scenario that almost always advantages the first shooter anyway.

Know which LMGs score the most kills per hour on average? It's not the Orion/MSW-R/CARV, which have the highest RPM. It's the NS-15M, the SVA-88, the Polaris, the Anchor, the CARV-S, the Gauss SAW S, the Ursa, the EM6... even the EM1 and Bull. And nobody's even saying the Orion/MSW-R/CARV are bad weapons! But when you look at performance, sometimes it surprises you what kind of numbers get put up by weapons people think of as "bad." The fact of the matter is that 143/652 and 167/550 are entirely serviceable damage tiers. Heck, even the Corvus and NS-15M do well and their DPS tiers are worse than that.

The DA stat site indicates that performance on the GD-7F is not altogether that different from AC-X11 and Razor performance. One of these weapons is 200/500 and one is 167/550. The Jaguar and Serpent perform almost identically. And filtering out the Zenith as its sample size is still lowish the best-performing VS Carbine in average KPH, Accuracy, and behind only the VX6-7 in KDR is... the Solstice Burst. Seriously. Solstice freaking Burst outperforms the Serpent statistically in terms of actual player usage. Also players who own platinum NS weapons are just better players than ones that don't. It's the bling, clearly.

Is it? Is it really? I had the same opinion until I did some actual tests, which seem to indicate that Lynx has more recoil per second than both GD-7F and Serpent.

So? It also has less angle variation (pretty sure it was like 8-9 degrees right last time PTS could be datamined). Recoil intensity is also rarely the issue; if it were, nobody would use the SAW.

Well it seems to have more recoil per shot. But: "vertical recoil doesn't matter, you can easily compensate" anyways. TR and VS have been saying. 125 damage tier should go 0.04 bloom per shot though. Otherwise 143 damage tier will still remain superior.

You can't just say "Lynx is more accurate", then switch your stance to "well I don't care if it has more recoil".

Before you may or may not read this long winded post, keep in mind that I said that RPM is an important factor when considering weapons in the same damage bracket. Also, please consider that my comments are written with the mindset focusing on (lol) close quarters .
Also, player skill must be taken into account when analyzing numbers on how well weapons do. More often than not, mediocre weapons will do statistically better because skilled players want the medal, not because the weapons are good.

Vonic is successful because of his skill. His weapons don't enable him to do well; they're merely different flavors on the LA ice cream. The advantages of higher rpm is understated too often. Higher rpm allows one to minimizing engagement times and secure 1v1 fights against opponents of equal(and sometimes higher) skill. RPM is an equally important factor as reload times, recoil, bloom, and damage.

People bring up that 1v1s are very situational. I disagree; 1v1s happen quite a bit, especially in LA duels on rooftops. Even in engagements involving more enemies, higher ttk allows one to down and switch targets faster. An opponent using a mercenary will will against an opponent using a cougar, more often than not. An opponent using a GD-7F will will against another using a VX6-7, more often than not.

How is it difficult to hit short reloads on the 143dmg@845rpm weapons? Good bullet management and knowing when your weapon will down an enemy with nanoweave discounts that disadvantage. 30 rounds is plenty to kill 2 enemies. 40 is even better, in the case of the old Lynx, which had a good mix of damage per magazine and rounds per minute.

You've proven that the new Lynx is competitive with the GD-7F/Serpent in close quarters, but the old Lynx stacks up to the competition better than the new Lynx. The old Lynx can hit it's short reload almost guaranteed because of its damage model and bullet dmg, while the new Lynx suffers from being a bullet hose. The old Lynx has better damage per magazine, making sure that you don't get killed while reloading. The new Lynx may have faster ttk than the old Lynx if going for headshots, but the old Lynx is better than the new Lynx in CLOSE QUARTERS(merely bolding is for noobz) in both ads and hipfire. The old Lynx can kill faster and more accurately than the new Lynx from the hip, is more mobile while ads, and can kill more people per magazine.

These qualities that the old Lynx has over the new Lynx are further accentuated when compared to the Serpent/GD-7F. The old Lynx is better than the new Lynx in close quarters, at least out to 15 meters.

The Corvus does well not because it's a good weapon, but because the only people that are willing use such a weapon are auraxium hunters, and people going for auraxium medal are usually the better skilled players.

The NS-15M has merit because of its 0.75x ads speed multiplier. If NC and TR were to receive a 0.75x ads weapon, the popularity of the NS-15M would indisputably dwindle, similarly to how NC and TR medics don't use the NS-11A as much.

The SVA-88 is popular because of its 0.75x ads speed multiplier, the fact that the recoil is more easily controlled than the Orion's, and the better magazine size. In the SVA-88's case, it is a toss-up between RPM for the orion or controlability for the SVA-88.

The Polaris, similar to the Corvus, does well not because it's a good weapon, but because the only people that are willing to use it are the auraxium hunters.

The Anchor and EM6 will do well because they have the highest rpm for LMG's in the 167 damage tier.

The Ursa is okay, but the Flare is better at viable engagement ranges for a heavy, because of it's rpm. People take the Ursa for its controlability and people take the Flare because of its RPM.

The Gauss SAW-S is a good weapon, but the Anchor and EM6 are better and more popular because of their higher rpm. Popularity is not the best measure of determining how good a weapon is, but when the Anchor and EM6 are popular as they are on the HA forum, RPM has to be doing some good to the weapons.

As for the EM1 and Bull... yes, 143@652 rpm weapons without 0.75x ads speed multiplier are serviceable, but they are by no means good. The EM1 can save some face because of extended mag availability, but the Bull falls in the category of the Corvus: only used for the medal.

RPM should only be considered when evaluating weapons in the same damage category. The GD-7F performs well in close ranges, the ACX-11 performs well in medium ranges, and the Razor performs decently in medium-long ranges. The Jaguar and Serpent perform identically because the Jaguar is, sadly, the closest thing TR has to the old Lynx. The Jaguar also has a 0.75x ads speed multiplier, and is the most versatile weapon in the TR carbine arsenal. Solstice burst outperforms the serpent because it costs 100 certs, as opposed to 250 certs. Also, the ever present medal hunters contribute to the solstice burst's performance.

Ultimately, there are advantages and disadvantages to weapons with higher rpm. However, in close quarters, RPM is one of the more important factors in determining which weapons are successful. RPM is a stat that should not be downplayed.

Crap, there goes 30 minutes


On a side note:

Wait, what? People use the SAW despite the high recoil. They like it for the damage. Recoil intensity is almost always an issue. Why do players use the Anchor and EM6 when the SAW is available? The damage over time is almost the same. Similarly, why do some people use the Razor over the default Mercenary? Faster reloads and easier to control recoil. Why did some people use the Jaguar over the old Lynx? It had arguably more controllable recoil.

Recoil is most definitely the issue.

Furthermore, these 143dmg@652rpm no 0.75x ads weapons you tout so highly are used because of their (wait for it) lack of recoil.

Vertical recoil is not a factor in sustained accuracy. It just isn't. High FSRMs are a greater problem than the actual vertical recoil factor itself. The Lynx's problem isn't handling (which is how the Serpent and GD-7F are balanced to some extent), it's COF expansion. Having the bloom profile of a 143 weapon is the intended downside to the 125 damage tier based on the stat profiles of the two weapons SOE has added to the game with this profile. The 125 profile is more accurate than the 143 profile at a higher rate of fire that evens out to comparable DPS for its role (and higher DPS/lower TTK with headshots), but it blooms faster and has less damage per magazine (although the Lynx still has almost a full kill more than its competitors).

The TORQ is the best example of this in practice now that it's in-game. It has higher recoil per second than the T1 Cycler, but it is highly accurate and at certain ranges can perform better in terms of shots on target over time. The Lynx 2.0 is basically the proto-TORQ, and it clearly handles better than the GD-7F and Serpent and definitely has a gentler angle variance (which is a critical factor in sustainable ADS accuracy).

Maybe you just need to get used to it? The newish 125 tier (discounting the SMGs that had that max damage) is a different beast, a unique fire model akin to the NC 200 damage tier but sort of inverted in terms of its performance. There are only two weapons that use it so far and they're both fairly new, but both weapons show extraordinary promise (the TORQ moreso perhaps but the Lynx is still great). People are playing too much Spreadsheetside and moaning and crying about a fantastic weapon that's probably better than its competitors because it isn't what they wanted and they think the old one was better due to its on-paper statistics looking that way. That isn't the case, except for one advantage the old Lynx has that everyone refuses to acknowledge was a bug and would not have continued to exist anyway.

I'm not arguing with that, it's also not entirely what I was talking about. I'm just saying that before we see actual recoil stats we can't make statements like "Lynx is more accurate", and the testing so far is not in the Lynx's favor. We have no idea what horizontal recoil Lynx has, and as a weapon with higher RoF it's subjected to it more often.

I'm not having any problems with the Lynx, I'm not even using it. Just having a theoretical / scientific discussion.

I don't have a strong opinion whether the new Lynx is bad or good, I hated the previous version, and find current version pretty meh, as well as the whole "125 dmg tier" new TR meta, at least not until hit detection gets fixed, and even after that higher damage tier will have an inherent advantage.

I have. It's alright, but I still would like the option to have the old one.

Meh. I've auraxiumed the Lynx before the change, in its "final" nerfed state. The old one is better in CQC.

The superior hipfire may have been a bug; you said in the past that you speculated that. Even if it was a bug, it was still an advantage; but, it wasn't the old Lynx's only advantage. The higher damage per magazine and 0.75x ads speed multiplier also make the old Lynx superior to the new Lynx in close quarters.

The 125 tier has an inherent advantage of its own when headshotting, but suffers lower bodyshot alpha. It's balanced numerically but has a higher skill cap. However, arguably the 200 damage tier and its higher alpha damage has its own skill cap issues, in that 200 damage weapons behave somewhat counterintuitively in terms of their mobility disadvantages and the stop-shoot-go-stop-shoot-go aspect that maximizes their COF advantages while standing still. 143 and 167 are, essentially, the generic damage tiers and somewhat easier to utilize because of that.

None of that prevents the Lynx from being basically as effective as its counterparts in similar use situations. High-control players and high-headshot-percentage players will gravitate more toward the damage tier it's now in. But it's hardly become unusable for the poke-em-in-the-back-and-squeeze-the-trigger playstyle. And when you have any amount of distance and time, you now have the opportunity to leverage a more effective ADS profile.

Regardless, the old Lynx isn't coming back, and the Jaguar's still here. If not for the bug, the Jag even has better hipfire than the old Lynx. What's wrong with the Jaguar again? It kills marginally slower in ideal circumstances?

Didn't you say that it was speculated as a bug? Also, as usual, you downplay the advantage of higher RPM in CQC. There's nothing wrong with the Jaguar; it's just that the Lynx was better in CQC because of its better hipfire and rpm. The Jaguar is better at medium range because of it's debatably more controllable recoil and better minimum damage.

Let's also see how the new Lynx stacks up to the Jaguar.

-Damage per magazine? Jaguar wins.
-Minimum damage? Jaguar wins.
-0.75x ads speed multiplier? Jaguar wins.
- TTK? "Jaguar kills marginally slower". New Lynx wins.
-Recoil? I don't know, but the Jaguar feels better to me.
-Reload? New Lynx wins, but damage per magazine makes this area of debate a bit of a wash.
-Price? 250 vs 1000, Jaguar wins.
-bloom? Jaguar wins.
-Almost forgot, hipfire? Jaguar wins.

The ttk/rpm advantage that you downplay so much is the new Lynx's only real advantage against the Jaguar. The old Lynx had the ttk advantage, as well as the hipfire advantage, and struck even in terms of 0.75x ads speed.

The old Lynx is better than the new Lynx in CQC. The Jaguar boasts many advantages against the new Lynx still. What advantages does Lynx 2.0 bring to the TR carbine arsenal? I mean, it's a great weapon and all after using it, but what real advantages does it bring?

Similarly to how you understate the merits of higher rpm, you also exaggerate the advantages of 125 damage headshots in the TR carbine arsenal.

There's the line of thought that the 125 damage headshot advantage is enough. However, when does it matter? at close ranges, you're hipfiring, at which both the old Lynx and Jaguar are better. At medium ranges, the damage drops off to 100, lower than the 112 minimum damage of the Jaguar. Furthermore, at medium ranges, there are better weapon choices: the Cougar and the T5 AMC.

Is the Lynx 2.0 versatile? The Jaguar is more versatile. Is the Lynx 2.0 better than the old Lynx in CQC? No. Is the Lynx better than the Cougar or T5 AMC at medium ranges? No.

You're asking me? I wouldn't know, that's what I've been saying from the start - that the Lynx is a copy of Jaguar with 50 more RoF and horrible recoil.

How do we get access to the recoil statistics so we can get that adjusted?

We wait for the spreadsheet to get updated. We could also try to contact the author on reddit, or try to datamine the info ourselves, with the archive extractor mentioned in the "about" section of the spreadsheet.

Alright I messaged him. Hopefully we can get this cleared up now.